The above stated public servants have failed to provide full information to us ie HRW as per RTI Act , therebycovering up the criminals. The requested informations were no state secrets , no defense secrets but the accountability of above stated public offices. The information was requestedfor public welfare , to secure equitable justice to public , to stop corrupt practices in public service , in exerciseof my FUNDAMENTAL DUTY as a citizen of India. Howeverthe above stated public servants preferred to violate law themselves & to protect the criminals.

The public servants & the government must be role models in law abiding acts , for others to emulate & follow. if a student makes a mistake it is excusable & can be corrected by the teacher. if the teacher himself makes a mistake , allhis students will do the same mistake. if a thief steals , he can be caught, legally punished & reformed . if a police himself commits crime , many thieves go scot-free under his patronage.even if a police , public servant commits a crime , he can be legally prosecuted & justice can be sought by the aggrieved.

just think , if a judge himself that too of apex court of the land itself commits crime - violations of RTI Act , constitutional rights & human rights of publicand obstructs the public from performing their constitutional fundamental duties , what happens ?

it gives a booster dose to the rich & mighty , those in power , criminals in public service to commit more crimes. that is exactly what is happening in india. the educated public must raise to the occasion & peacefully , democraticallymust oppose this criminalization of judiciary , public service. then alone , we can build a RAM RAJYA OF MAHATMA GANDHI'S DREAM.

In India no constitutional authority is supreme or unaccountable. Citizens of India are supreme an every constitutional authority is accountable to them. Here with whole hearted respects to all constitutional authorities , we request the honourable chief justice of India to study all articles in this news paper in detail & to answer all questions in public. Questionnaire is available athttp://crosscji.blogspot.com/ ,

Kindly go through the following articles & provide justice by giving complete truthful information to us.

The constitution of India has prescribed certain FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES to each citizens of India. It is the duty of every citizen to protect & uphold the dignity , honour of our democratic institutions , to protect our national integrity , to respect & protect the rights of our fellow citizens. No constitutional authority has the right to obstruct the discharge of these duties by citizens of India. No legal privileges of constitutional functionaries is superior over the FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES OF CITIZEN'S OF INDIA.

We need rights to perform our duties. Constitution of India has guaranteed those rights as FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS to all citizens of India & by birth itself everyone of us has secured HUMAN RIGHTS as individuals. To express ourselves , we need information , data feed back , to ascertain whether we are getting equal opportunity , whether we are getting equitable justice , etc , we need information . so , basically Right To Information is an inalienable part of our fundamental rights & human rights. What RTI Act has done is fixed time limit , responsibilities of public servants up to certain extent. However the citizen's fundamental right & human right to seek information extends far beyond the scope of RTI Act.

Hereby , we seek complete truthful information from supreme court of India , with respect to my RTI application appeal no : APPEAL NO. 91 / 2007 & Dy.No.541/RTI/08-09/SCI DATED 18.12.2008 . HEREBY , WE ARE ONLY SEEKING ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC SERVANTS IN PUBLIC INTEREST & JUSTICE. Hereby , we request you to register this appeal as a PIL petition & to ascertain the stand of apex court on various matters raised in my RTI Application , in public interest & euitable justice. JAI HIND. VANDE MATARAM.

Your's sincerely,

Nagaraj.M.R.

QUESTIONS PUBLIC SERVANTS ARE AFRAID TO ANSWER – Indian judges , Police & Public servants in the Witness Box

The police , judges , public servants , etc question the accussed persons , to ascertain the root cause of crime or dispute, to know the truth behind every actions. The police even apply 3rd degree torture on commoners ( although it is illegal ) to elicit truth , information about crimes. When the same public wants to know the truth behind crimes involving police , judges & public servants , and seeking truth , answers , informations as per RTI ACT from police , judges & public servants , they are not answering lest the truth come out. They are citing one or the other technical reasons to hide information , to hide truth about crimes , to shield the criminals. If any of the following public servants truly stands for law , justice , truth , let them answer for the following questions publicly through media

The only thing corrupt public servants know is to neglect the complaints of public , if somebody pursues with his complaint he is silenced either by falsely fixing him up or by snatching his sources of livelihood or by finishing him off. But , at the end of the day no justice to common man. The corrupt public servant triumphs , injustice triumphs.

THE FALL OF THE ANGEL-CORRUPT INDIAN JUDICIARY
the four main pillars of democratic setup in india are legislative ,
judiciary , executive & the enlightened citizens . now, one pillar
after the other has started to crumble down paving the way for anarchy
in future. in india there are not much of the enlightened citizens
around.even the few who are there, are silenced by the criminal nexus
while doing their fundamental duties as per the constitution of
india.the rest of the citizens are kept in the dark, denied the
awareness about democratic dynamics , by choking them for information.
in india multi billion dollar defence deals to drainage civil
constuction by the munciapality comes under "official secrets act".
eventhough technically some informations does not fall under the
purview of O.S.A. the ruling elite does not readily share the
information.in democracy INFORMATION & THE EXPRESSION are key to it's
functioning .by denying that key to the citizens the ruling setup
alienates them from decision making process .thus, the enlightened
citizens the pillar has been razed down to earth by the ruling elite.
now, the criminalisation of politics has taken place almost completely
in india. those criminals have appointed other criminals to the vital
positions in the government .the criminal nexus of
CRIMINAL-POLICE-POLITICIAN-BUREAUCRAT is reigning in India , violating
the funamental / human rights of crores of indian citizens , robbing
them of their national wealth worth billions. thereby other two
pillars of democracy the legislative & the executive have fallen down.
now, the one & only remaining pillar of democracy in india is the
INDIAN JUDICIARY. it is the angel who provides justice to the
commonners. now, the tentacles of corruption has engulfed the Indian
judiciary too . there are charges against various judges ranging from
bribery ,theft ,practice of untouchability ,false affidavit to murder
.one judge has been accussed of literally running an AUCTION HOUSE OF
JUDICIAL ORDERS in association with the underworld. in that place
everything from BAIL,STAY TO ACQUITTAL FROM CASE was available for a
price of course.
it is only due to the pioneering efforts of media these scandals have
come to light .the judiciary has hidden those scandals in a hush hush
manner from the public eye. recently it was reported in " deccan
herald " that a district judge of u.p. was acting as a pimp since
years & supplying mod girls to politicians. in another report it was
stated that a district judge of tamilnadu demanded sexual favours from
a woman to give favourable judgement in a case when she refused to do
his bidding he allegdely tried to rape her. quite recently, there was
a news report about immoral acts of certain high ranking judges in a
resort near mysore. it was indirectly implied that certain wowen
advocates who were selected as judges were returning the favours
immorally to the senior judges (who were in the selection committee) .
i,as a human rights activist have requested various constitutional
authorities to provide information about the misdoings of government
officials , ministers ,judges & godmen. i didn't even receive the
receipt of acknowledgement. i have even tried to file public interest
litigations at the SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ,but to no avail. Even my
requests for information from government authorities including
supreme court of India as per RTI Act was not honoured.
in my crusade seeking justice for all, i have myself suffered numerous
injustices ,my news papers were closed down, i have suffered murder
attempts on me , inspite of all these the CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA , THE
CHAIRMAN OF NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION , THE CENTRAL VIGILANCE
COMMISSIONER kept mum, didn't do their constitutional duties inspite
of my repeated requests . thereby, they have violated my human rights
& fundamental rights & have been obstructed from performing my
constitutionally provided FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES.
The courts of justice needs evidences to act upon , the public
servants don't give records / reports which in turn becomes evidences
, the public servants by taking bribe makes falsed biased
interpretation of law , give favourable reports to rich & mighty ( but
false reports ). The courts in turn depending on those false reports
acquits rich & mighty , whereas the poor suffers injustices for being
unable to produce evidences. The courts have the power , authority for
ordering participation of public , aggrieved parties in the
investigation teams enforcing various laws ( thereby the corrupt acts
of public servants can be checked ) , but courts don't excercise that
authority. See how the nexus of corrupt public servants ï¿½ law
enforcement agencies ï¿½ judiciary works in India favouring the rich &
subjugating the poor. Ofcourse , there are very few exceptions.
PF SCAM SHAME SHAME CORRUPT JUDGES visit following websites ,
http://corruptmajority.blogspot.com/ ,
http://corruptjudges.rediffblogs.com/

Office for Profit: A Stink You Should Smell

Former Supreme Court Chief Justice YK Sabharwal was involved in dubious judicial deal-making that earned his sons huge profits. So says a group of engaged and credible citizens led by former Law Minister Shanti Bhushan. And they have evidence to back their claims. Sanjay Dubey pieces together their case

"The issue of sealing was difficult as on the one hand it was a question of law and on the other of the suffering among the people.” This is how JusticeYK Sabharwal, the former Chief Justice of India (CJI), described the demolition drive that had brought the nation’s capital to a virtual standstill for weeks. In an interaction with the media on the eve of his retirement in January, Sabharwal singled out the Supreme Court’s action against Delhi’s shopkeepers as the most difficult decision he had taken as the Chief Justice. He elaborated on why it had become such a huge dilemma for him. “I earned the wrath of my relatives. Yesterday one of my relatives [affected by the sealing order] told me sarcastically that I am a big man. I told him I couldn’t solve individual problems.”

The anguish with which the former chief justice of India described the sealing drive as the most difficult decision of his career, however, flies in the face of facts unearthed by a committee of equally eminent citizens called the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms. The Committee’s patrons include such veteran torchbearers of public integrity as former law minister Shanti Bhushan, Justice VR Krishna Iyer, Admiral RH Tahiliani and the Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan.

Documents gathered from many government departments by the committee cast a shadow of taint over the actions of Justice Sabharwal who, Shanti Bhushan says, “was a very competent judge”. (See interview) Contrary to what Sabharwal said, the Committee’s findings show that far from earning the wrath of his relatives, “the former chief justice has earned the gratitude of his family,” as Shanti Bhushan puts it. The documents — perused by TEHELKA — show that Sabharwal’s sons, Chetan Sabharwal and Nitin Sabharwal, clearly stood to benefit from their father’s orders. His orders, thus, are against the principles of natural justice which say that no judge can hear a case in which he has a personal interest. According to Shanti Bhushan, instead of excusing himself because of conflict of interest, Sabharwal remained the presiding officer of the sealing case from 2004 till he retired in January 2007.

It all flared up on February 16, 2006, the day then Chief Justice of India, YK Sabharwal, passed the order which set in motion the process of sealing of properties being used for commercial purposes in designated residential areas in Delhi. The sealing and demolition drive to implement the court order forced thousands of small and medium-sized commercial establishments to either shut shop or buy or rent premises in malls and commercial complexes.

There were reports of suicides and heart attacks as the government tried to cope with a precarious law and order situation in the capital; it had little choice but to implement the Supreme Court’s (SC) orders. Everything was being done in the name of upholding the law — or so it seemed. It now transpires that even as Delhi was bleeding, Justice Sabharwal’s elder son Chetan and younger son Nitin, were breaking the law.

Documents presented by the Committee reveal that at least two companies owned by Chetan and Nitin — Pawan Impex (PI) and Harpawan Constructors (HC) — were operating from their father’s private residence, 3/81, Punjabi Bagh, when the sealing drive was in full swing. Even more surprising is the fact that for the greater part of 2004, Pawan Impex was operating out of 6, Motilal Nehru Place, the official residence of Justice Sabharwal, who was then one of the senior-most SC judges. According to documents filed by Pawan Impex with the Department of Company Affairs, its registered office was shifted from 3/81, Punjabi Bagh to 6, Motilal Nehru Place in January 2004. For the next 10 months, the house of a senior SC judge — Sabharwal — was also the firm’s registered office.

Documents from the Department of Company Affairs also reveal that on October 23, 2004, the promoter of one of the biggest shopping malls and commercial complexes in Delhi, Kabul Chawla of Business Park Town Planners (BPTP) Limited, was inducted in Pawan Impex as a 50 percent shareholder. On the same day, Pawan Impex’s registered office was shifted back to its old address in Punjabi Bagh. Soon thereafter, Chawla’s wife, Anjali Chawla, was also made a director in the company.

Sabharwal’s sons nurtured ambitious real-estate dreams. And they began laying its foundations when they set up a construction company, called Harpawan Constructors, on April 8, 2005. An important decision taken by their father a few days earlier was going to change both Delhi’s and their fortunes.

On March 17, 2005, Justice Sabharwal, who at the time was dealing with the case of polluting industries operating in residential areas, ordered that he would now also deal with the case of commercial establishments operating from residential areas. Another bench of the Supreme Court had admitted this case in 2003.

In October 2005, another bigwig in the Delhi mall business, Purushottam Bhageria of Fargo estates, joined hands with Chetan and Nitin. He was appointed a director in Harpawan Constructors, as was his brother Madhusudan Bhageria. Soon after this, Bhageria announced his plans to develop Square 1 Mall in Saket in New Delhi. It was touted as one of the largest and most luxurious malls planned in Delhi.

In November 2005, Justice Sabharwal became the cji and by February 16, 2006 when he passed the “most difficult” order of his life to seal the commercial establishments operating from residential areas, his sons were on track to enter the mall and commercial complexes business in a big way, having sewn up partnerships with two of the biggest commercial real estate developers in Delhi.

The Sabharwals’ commercial complex development business took off thereafter. On June 21, 2006, Pawan Impex’s share-capital increased from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 3 crore. Then, on September 30, 2006, the Chawlas of BPTP developers invested Rs 1.5 crore in the company. On August 22, 2006, Pawan Impex was given a Rs 28-crore loan by the Union Bank of India. The loan was secured by mortgaging the “plant, machinery and other assets” lying in plots A-3, 4 and 5 in Sector 125, Noida. But, in fact, there is no plant or machinery here. Instead, a huge it park — Park Centra — worth hundreds of crores is being built by BPTP Ltd.

Sources in the Noida Authority have confided that these three plots (A-3, 4 and 5 in Noida’s Sector 125) were allotted to Pawan Impex on December 29, 2004 by the Mulayam Singh government then in power in UP at Rs 3,700/sq. metre, when the market price of commercial land here was at least Rs 30,000/sq. metre. Moreover, a commercial plot measuring 12,000 sq metres (plot 12A, in Sector 68) was allotted to another company owned by the Sabharwals, Sabs Exports, on November 10, 2006, at Rs 4,000/square metre. The market price of commercial plots there at the time was at least 10 times as much.

These are not the only plots allotted at throwaway prices to the Sabharwals. On November 6, 2000, Sabs Exports was allotted three plots (C103, 104 and 105) measuring 800 square metres each in Sector 63 at a rate of Rs 2,100/square metre, when the market price was many times higher.

TEHELKA has documents which show that a residential plot in Noida’s upSCale Sector 44 was allotted to Justice Sabharwal’s daughter-in-law, Sheeba Sabharwal, in 2005. It is noteworthy that this plot was part of the Noida allotment SCam — wherein plots were allotted to sundry influential people and their relatives, when in fact they were supposed to have been allotted by a random draw of lots.

An embarrassed UP government cancelled the allotments. The SC for some reason immediately stayed the CBI probe into the allotments ordered by the Allahabad High Court. It is perhaps also significant that Justice Sabharwal himself stayed the publication of the so-called Amar Singh tapes, which were said to have phone conversations that showed Singh in poor light.

“Thus, from owning smalltime export-import firms till 2004, the Sabharwals in just two years time got into the business of developing commercial complexes and appear to be rolling in money,” the report by the Committee concludes. All this happened when Justice Sabharwal was a senior judge and then the Chief Justice, dealing with the sealing cases and passing orders which stood to benefit his sons and their partners.

The continuing good fortune of the Sabharwals can be gauged by their recent purchase of a property worth several crores. TEHELKA has a sale deed of a house in south Delhi’s upscale Maharani Bagh which shows that Chetan and Nitin purchased a 1,180-square-yard bungalow (B-9 Maharani Bagh) in March 2007 from the heirs of former Law Minister Jagannath Kaushal for a stated consideration of Rs 15.43 crore. They gave their father’s name as Yogesh Kumar (minus the surname Sabharwal) and their office address instead of their Punjabi Bagh residence address.

On May 28, the Income Tax department sent a notice to Pawan Impex seeking details of their business activities, accounts, assets and sources of funds. But the legal experts TEHELKA spoke to feel that the matter is more serious. The conduct of Justice Sabharwal and his sons appears to involve offences beyond the purview of the Income Tax Act.

Legal experts, including Prashant Bhushan, feel that the extent to which mall developers funded the asset-acquisition by the Sabharwals needs to be probed.

Several attempts by TEHELKA to contact Justice Sabharwal for his response to the charges went unanswered.

The charges made by the committee underscore the need for a National Judicial Commission, an independent body with an investigative arm, which can look into complaints against judges. It only stands to reason that the guardians of the law come under the purview of the same laws they base their judgements on.

Justice Sabharwal's Defence Gets Murkier

Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, part of the eminent panel that framed allegations against former Chief Justice of India YK Sabharwal, rebuts the retired judge’s rejoinder point by point

Using the strategy of a clever and street-smart defence lawyer, JusticeYK Sabharwal’s defence of the serious charges levelled against him sidesteps the inconvenient and emphasises the irrelevant to evoke sympathy. To examine the adequacy of his defence, we need to see his defence against the gravamen of each charge against him.

CHARGE NO. 1 That his sons’ companies had shifted their registered offices to his official residence.

SABHARWAL’S RESPONSE: That as soon as he came to know he ordered his sons’ to shift them back.

OUR REJOINDER: This is false. In April 2007, in a recorded interview with the Mid-Day reporter MK Tayal he feigned total ignorance of the shifting of the offices to his official residence. In fact, the registered offices were shifted back from his official residence to his Punjabi Bagh residence exactly on the day that the Business Park Town Planners Ltd (BPTP) mall developers became his sons’ partners, making it very risky to continue at his official residence.

CHARGE NO. 2 That he called for and dealt with the sealing of commercial property case in March 2005, though it was not assigned to him. It is only the Chief Justice (CJ)who can assign pending cases to various judges. He was not the CJ at that time. Justice Sabharwal does not answer this charge.

CHARGE NO. 3 That he did this exactly around the time that his sons got into partnerships with mall and commercial complex developers, who stood to benefit from his sealing orders.

HIS RESPONSE: That they were his sons’ friends. That Harpawan Constructors which was set up by his sons with the mall developer Purushottam Bagheria did not do any business. In fact the courts under him got Bagheria’s 1 MG road mall demolished. That his sons are not developing shopping malls but only an IT park.

OUR REJOINDER: If so many mall and commercial complex developers were his sons’ close friends, then he should not have dealt with the case anyway since that creates an immediate conflict of interest. Moreover, why should they go into partnership with these developers who stood to benefit from Justice Sabharwal’s orders, and that too exactly at the time when he seizes control of the sealing of commercial property case and starts dealing with it. He says that the company set up by his sons in partnership with Bagheria has not done any business. If so, why was this new company set up for developing commercial complexes in partnership with this builder?

In an interview with Zee News, Justice Sabharwal claims credit for the judiciary under him ordering the demolition of the illegal 1 MG road mall owned by Bagheria. But then why do his sons enter into partnerships with such an illegal builder whose buildings have had to be demolished by the Judiciary? And immediately after this partnership with the Sabharwals, Bagheria went on to announce the construction of “Square 1 mall” in Saket as the most fashionable mall in India. And all the fashion designers who had their shops and outlets at 1 MG road went on to buy space in the Square 1 mall.

What is important to note here is that Bagheria and his partners at 1 MG road had already parted with all the space on 1 MG.The demolition thus hurt the designers and others who had bought shops there, but did not hurt Bagheria who may have benefited from it by clearing the land of his tenants and getting them to buy space at his new malls in Saket and elsewhere. An IT park is also a commercial complex like any other. Many commercial establishments sealed were IT centres and BPOs which were forced to buy space in IT parks like that being constructed by his sons and their partners.

CHARGE NO. 4 That the Union Bank of India gave a loan of Rs 28 crore to his sons’ company: Pawan Impex on a collateral of plant and machinery and other moveables at the site of their proposed IT park, which were non-existent.

HIS RESPONSE: That his sons’ had a credit facility of Rs 75 crore.

OUR REJOINDER: If that were the case, what was the need for mortgaging non-existent assets for obtaining this loan? Moreover, the banks’ senior manager is on record saying that the loan was given on the basis of projected sales to prospective customers.

CHARGE NO. 5 That because of the obvious conflict of interest, he could not have dealt with this case.

HIS RESPONSE: That his orders have never benefited his sons.

OUR REJOINDER: His orders of sealing lakhs of commercial properties clearly forced those establishments to buy or rent space in commercial complexes like those that his sons’ company were constructing; and shopping malls etc that their friends and partners were constructing. There was a clear conflict of interest and his orders have clearly benefited his sons and their partners.

CHARGE NO. 6 That a large number of industrial and commercial plots were allotted in Noida by the UP government to his sons’ companies, at prices far below the market price. In particular, several huge plots were allotted between December 2004 and November 2006 by the Mulayam Singh/Amar Singh government, while he was dealing with the Amar Singh tapes case, and had stayed the publication of those tapes on the behest of Amar Singh.

HIS RESPONSE: That some of the plots were allotted by earlier different governments. That the prices were not far below the market price. That the allotments were made in the normal course to his sons who were entrepreneurs and were providing employment to hundreds of people in Noida.

OUR REJOINDER: The allotments are definitely not in the normal course. How can three plots of one acre each be allotted to one company on the same date? In fact, these allotments are made at a time when the share capital of this company was just Rs 1 lakh and it had no track record of making any IT park or doing any business whatsoever. They have been allotted within days of the application with no procedure of draw of lots or any other system being followed, other than a bogus interview. The rate of Rs 3,700 per square metre was far below the market rate, and anybody including us would be happy to buy these plots at three times the allotment rate today. The huge plot of three acres, No. 12 A in Sector 68 (which appears to be carved out later for them) to Sabs Exports in November 2006 at a throwaway price of Rs 4,000 per square metre is also not in the normal course and was similarly made within days of application and a bogus interview, without any other system. Moreover, the allotment has been made at a time when he was dealing with the Amar Singh tapes case and had stayed the publication of the tapes. We would be happy to buy that plot too at three times the price at which it was given to them.

CHARGE NO. 7 That his sons have purchased a 1,150-square metre house in Maharani Bagh, New Delhi in March 2007 for a consideration of Rs 15.46 crore. The source of money for this is unexplained and in the sale deed they seek to conceal their relationship with Justice Sabharwal by writing his name as Yogesh Kumar and giving their factory address instead of the residential address.

HIS RESPONSE: That 90 percent of the money for the purchase of this house was from four banks; that his sons concealed his full name in the sale deed in order to avoid taking advantage of their association with him.

OUR REJOINDER: Banks do not normally advance loans of 90 percent of the value of a property on its security. Otherwise they would end up holding inadequate security if the property prices fall by even 15 percent. If they have done so in this case, it is either because of an undue favour as in the case of the loan of Rs 28 crore to Pawan Impex, or they valued the property higher than the declared purchase price. His explanation for concealing his name in the sale deed is hilarious and unbelievable since his sons did not hesitate to use his official residence as the registered office of their companies. Moreover, this was in a registered sale deed with a private party, where there was no occasion for taking any advantage by using his name.

It is therefore clear that Justice Sabharwal is guilty of serious judicial misconduct and appears to be prima facie guilty of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act which need to be investigated.

THE JUDICIARY is in the news in ways that do not do it credit. Beginning with the `defeated'

Justice V. Ramaswamy impeachment in the early 1990s, the last decade portrays scandals. These include the Bombay Pay-off Scandal of 1990, the controversy over the Bombay High Court Chief Justice Bhattacharjee receiving large "foreign" royalties in 1995, controversies, however founded or unfounded, over Justices Punchi and Anand - both Chief Justices of India - and Justice Bharucha's declaration that 20 per cent of judges are corrupt. The year 2002 has been a bad year. In Punjab, High Court judges are accused of having received favours from the Chairman of the Public Service Commission. In Rajasthan, the allegations countenance a High Court judge and his Deputy Registrar soliciting sexual favours. In Karnataka, allegations canvass compromising sexual conduct involving High Court judges. In Patna, there are serious allegations of corrupting the legal process by lawyers and the registry. Public confidence is shaken.

Judges reign and rule - with little external effective oversight over their conduct. Judicial independence cannot encompass judicial lawlessness, rampant corruption or conduct unbecoming. Justice Ramaswamy's impeachment suffered defeat in Parliament. The Supreme Court's Committee opined he could not be denied work. In Bombay, resignations took place. Using the `transfer' policy - now abandoned - does not satisfactorily deal with serious allegations against judges. Corruption is transferred, not dealt with. In the mid-1990s, the Supreme Court felt that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) could use his prestige to persuade judges to resign or not attend court, But, such an approach eludes results if the delinquent tells the CJI to mind his own business.

Witness the cases of Hastings and Clairbourne in America where judges refused to demit office until impeachment - in one case, even though the judge was imprisoned! Informal methods have failed; and do not command confidence in India.

An intermediate method has to be created so that judges are answerable and can be disciplined without compromising their independence. But, it is not just a question of disciplining judges; but, also of dealing with complaints against them in a swift and effective way. Such mechanisms exist for the lower judiciary, but not for High Court and Supreme Court judges. From the supercession controversy of 1973 when three judges were superceded for the post of CJI, there have been calls for a National Judicial Commission both to (a) make judicial appointments (which after the 1982, 1993 and 1998 judgments are - and, that too, not quite satisfactorily - in the hands of a conclave of Supreme Court judges) and (b) deal with complaints, corruption and misconduct. But, ongoing suggestions for a National Commission have fallen on fallow ground. Having wrested the patronage of appointment, the judges have dragged their feet on issues of judicial discipline except to produce unenforceable codes of conduct. What are required are constitutional and statutory amendments.

Recent history shows that where there is a will, constitutional amendments are possible. But, there is a lack of political and judicial will to introduce changes. Today, judges collectively and in judicial orders make all kinds of suggestions on their pay, salary, perks and other things. But no consensus suggestion to interrogate judicial indiscipline emerges with credible clarity. Individually India's Chief Justices provide evasive and contradictory answers.

In the midst of all this comes the controversy over the commendable resignation of Justice Venkataswami who was the sole Commissioner of the Tehelka Commission. Three issues arise. The first is: what went wrong? Something did. Sometimes judges do hold two post-retirement posts - without conflict or demur. But, the Tehelka Commission was not just an inquiry but an inquisition in which the Government had a massive political stake. The proposal to give another assignment to Mr. Venkataswami whilst he investigated Tehelka and its discontents should never have been made. The next slip up was Chief Justice Bharucha's recommendation behind which the Government seeks refuge. No less, the offer of appointment should have been declined. This is not a case of conspiracy, corruption or misconduct. Mr. Venkataswami integrity is beyond dispute.

The famous Pinochet case (1991) was re-heard because Lord Hoffman had broad links with a charity which, though not before the 'Lords', had a stake in the cause. In the Curative Petition case (2002), the Indian Supreme Court drew sustenance from the `Pinochet' example on the premise that justice must not only be done but always appear to be done. This sets the tone. Mr. Venkataswami has led by example. Purity is as important as cleanliness. At least one present judge of the Supreme Court declined an above board invitation to a seminar from an American university on the basis that it was unacceptable that anyone other than the Government of India should pay for such trips. This sets a standard.

The second issue that arises out of Tehelka is whether Mr. Venkataswami can simply be replaced by another judge. There is a stateable case that he cannot. Section 8A of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952, was amended in 1971 to permit a Commission to continue if a vacancy arose in a multi-member Commission. The assumption of continuity would survive because a member or members would continue. But, section 8A is inapplicable for a single-member Commission or where an entire Commission ceases to exist. It becomes non-existent (non est) and ceases to function (functus officio). Continuity is broken. Replacing Commissions afresh contrives its own politics. There is an even chance that any replacement appointment would be challenged to the discomfiture of any new appointee. This does not mean that the records of the Commission are not available for public use. So far, the only real public interest part of the Commission's work was over the military deals - which was heard in camera. These can be examined by a Joint Parliamentary Committee as raw evidence to interrogate lapses. The other aspect of the Commission's inquiry investigates Tehelka's journalistic conduct and wild, unfounded allegations that Tehelka tried to destabilise the stock exchange and personally benefit Tehelka's people and financiers. A lot of this is humbug. The `journalistic' ethics issue does not need a Commission's wisdom, but along with the accountability of the electronic media should be generally examined by public discourse. There are enough legal provisions to deal with `destabilising' frauds; but, the Government knows that they do not have a credible leg to stand on. On this basis, the Tehelka Commission needs to be wound up; but the `defence deals' examined by Parliament.

The third issue relates to the desirability of post-retirement appointments for judges. There is a dilemma here. Although Inquiry Commission reports generally gather dust, there is a public faith that only judges should head such inquiries - indeed, that is what made the T.T. Krishnamachari and Kairon inquiries of the 1950s credible. The answer lies in less inquiries and carefully chosen incumbents. Today, an inquiry is a general panacea to avoid any public allegation. The Commission process has been devalued. Several statutes - such as the Human Rights and others - necessitate judicial appointments. Such jobs cannot be multiplied as inducements.

India needs a policy on embargoing post-retirement jobs for judges whilst increasing their retiring age. The Public Commission procedure came to the fore in 1921 after the Marconi scandal around 1918 because Parliament could not be wholly trusted. Parliament needs to be more rigorous and credible - even though the nation was let down by the Bofors Joint Committee which wrongly absolved the, then, Prime Minister and others in 1987.The Indian judiciary has to confront its public image. India's judges

are massively powerful. They both compensate bad governance as well as fulfil the judicial quest for power. Judges may err in their judgments. But, if confidence in the Judiciary abates, Indian governance is in peril.

SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO H.E.PRESIDENT OF INDIA & HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE
OF INDIA.
In india democracy is a farce , freedom a mirage. the most basic
freedom RIGHT TO INFORMATION & EXPRESSION , is not honoured by the
government,as the information opens up the crimes of V.V.I.Ps & leads
to their ill-gotten wealth. The public servants are least bothered
about the lives of people or justice to them. these type of fat cats ,
parasites are a drain on the public exchequer . these people want
,wish me to see dead , wish to see evoice of humanrightswatch closed . so
that, a voice against injustices is silenced forever , the crimes of
V.V.I.Ps closed , buried forever.
To my numerous appeals , our appeals to you ,you have not yet
replied.it clearly shows that you are least bothered about the lives
of people or justice to them .it proves that you are hell bent to
protect the criminals at any cost. you are just pressurising the
police to enquire me ,to take my statement, to repeatedly call me to
police station all with a view to silence me.all of you enjoy "legal
immunity privileges" ,why don't you have given powers to the police /
investigating officer to summon all of you for enquiry ?or else why
don't all of you are not appearing before the police voluntarily for
enquiry ?at the least why don't all of you are not sending your
statement about the case to the police either through legal counsel or
through post? you are aiding criminals ,by denying me job
oppurtunities in R.B.I CURRENCY NOTE PRESS mysore , city civil court
,bangalore , distict court , mysore ,etc & by illegally closing my
newspaper.
there is a gross, total mismatch between your actions and your oath of
office. this amounts to public cheating & moral turpitude on your part.
1.you are making contempt of the very august office you hold.
2.you are making contempt of the constitution of india.
3.you are making contempt of citizens of india.
4.you are sponsoring & aiding terorrism & organized crime.
5.you are violating the fundamental & human rights of the citizens of
india and of neighbouring countries.
6.you are violating & making contempt of the U.N HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER
to which india is a signatory.
7.you are obstructing me from performing my fundamental duties as a
citizen of india.
Both of you are hereby called upon to SHOW-CAUSE within 30 days , why
you cann't be legally prosecuted for the above mentioned crimes . in
future , with regard to this case if i am called to police station or
court , etc, the loss of my wages & the related expenses must be borne
by the government. Meanwhile , if anything untoward happens to me or
to my dependents, both of you will be directly held responsible along
with the perpatrators of crime and you are liable to pay rupees twenty
lakhs as compensation to the survivors of my family.if none of my
dependents survive,donate rupees twenty lakhs to the mother theresa's
MISSIONARIES OF CHARITY TRUST,kolkata.india.
Date : 28.12.2008your’s sincerely,

Place : MyoreNagaraj.M.R.

PUBLIC CROSS-EXAMINATION OF HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA

Q1. Why not death sentence to corrupt police who murder people in in lock-up / fake encounters ?

Q2. Why not death sentence to corrupt police who apply 3rd degree torture on prisoners ?

Q7. If a commonman files a complaint , police / courts wants evidences , witnesses to take action against the rich & mighty crooks. Where as if a rich person just gives a complaint against a poor chap , he is arrested , tortured eventhough there are no evidences , witnesses. Why this double standard ?

Q8. If a poor chap tries to collect evidences as per his fundamental rights or as per RTI ACT , the public servants don't give full , truthfull information. Still , police / courts don't take action against those public servants hiding crimes. Why ?

Q9.why I was not permitted to appear as an "amicus curie" before jain commission of enquiry or supreme court of india probing late prime minister rajiv Gandhi assassination case ?

Q11. Whereas , I was enquired number of times by police & intelligence personnel about this case , but the culprits were not enquired even once , why ?

Q12.who compensates the losses I have suffered due to these injustices ? are not police responsible for it ?

Q13. Is it not the duty of police to protect the lives , livelihood of witnesses & all parties involved , both during case & afterwards ?

Q14. How do you monitor & check corrupt police personnel & increase in their family's wealth year after year ?

Q15. While getting appointed into government service from the rank of peon to IAS officer , police verification is mandatory. While appointing to sensitive defense establishments , research institutes in addition to police verification , central intelligence agencies cross-check candidate's background. However is there no background checks of constitutional functionaries , MPs , MLAs , , who are privy to national secrets ? why ?

Q16. Recently , the opposition parties have made allegations during presidential allegations that close relative of one of the front running candidates have swindled public money by their bank , misused public money through one of their NGO. Is it true ?

Q17.has GOI funded any terrorist outfits in india or abroad ?

Q18.india preaches non-violence , panchasheel principles to the world. In india , more than half the population are poor , people are starving to death. Inspite these background , GOI funded & aided terrorist outfits in former east Pakistan ensuring the creation of Bangladesh , GOI has funded & aided terrorist outfits like LTTE , TULF , ETC in srilanka , MQM in Pakistan. In turn these terrorist outfits have murdered thousands of innocents in those countries. Are these acts of GOI just & legal ? Is not GOI responsible for all those murders of innocents ? has GOI paid any compensation to those victims or their family mebers ? why not ?

Q20. In Jharkhand , chattisgarh , etc , the government has armed , trained & funded "salwa judum" to counter naxalites. Salwa judum cadres are terrorizing innocents just like naxalites. Is this action of government just & legal ?

Q21.in india, TADA , POTA is being rampantly misused by police. Even where there are no problems of terrorism , TADA / POTA is being slapped against innocents , even children. In M.M.Hills of Karnataka state , STF personnel charged tribal people with TADA on frivolous charges of taking lunch to veerappan , stiching dress for the forest brigand, etc. where as the prominent political, film , sports personalities who have links with underworld , anti national elements & attended parties hosted by dawood Ibrahim , other dons in gulf countries , else where. But these hi-fi people are not charged with TADA / POTA ? why ?

Q22. Film actor sanjay dutt had contacts with underworld & fully knowing well the criminal objectives of criminals , hid the dangerous arms & ammunition in his home , which were intended for terrorizing public. However mr.dutt is not charged with TADA / POTA instead he is charged with illegal possession of arms act ( which is normally applied to farmers who use illegal home made guns to scare away animals , birds in their farms ). Why this favourable treatment of mr.dutt by police ? prosecution ? is this because dutt is politically mighty & rich ?

Q23. Law is one & same for all , the public servants, police interpretes , enforces it differentially between rich & poor ? why this differentiation ?

Q24.recently in Bangalore police nabbed criminals belonging to international criminal syndicate selling duplicate nokia mobiles. Every nokia mobile comes with 15 digit IMEI number , this number is also used by police for tracking criminals. In consumer dispute at consumer disputes redressal forum Mysore CD 49/05 , nokia company stated that all it's products come with IMEI number only & stated that the product in dispute sold by tata indicom dealer M/S INTOTO COMMUNICATIONS , Mysore are not their's as it doesn't have IMEI numbers. Further nokia stated they don't have any business relationship with either tata indicom or it's dealer. However the tata indicom dealer stated that indeed his products are genuine , first hand products , but doesn't have IMEI numbers . this proves the dealer in collusion with tata company is selling illegal nokia mobile hand sets & cheating the public. These mobiles are evading taxes , as well as these are without IMEI numbers best buy for criminal elements who want to evade police tracking. What police are doing

Q25. Who , of which rank among police personnel takes the decision to close a case ie to file "B" report , when after certain time limit no leads are found in investigation ?

Q26. How do you monitor corrupt police personnel , who purposefully fail to investigate case properly , so that either the case can be closed with "B" report or the prosecution fails to prove the case in court ?

Q27. Who among police takes the decision to appeal against the verdict of a lower court , when the prosecution fails ?

Q28. Who took the decision , not to appeal against the argentina court order acquitting mr.quatrochi accussed in bofors scandal ?

Q29. Do you treat all the prison convicts same in the prison or does the notorious big time rich criminals get spacious barracks with tv, news paper , adequate food , medical care , etc while small time criminals , poor are crammed into pig sty like rooms with 60-70 inmates without any basic requirements ?

Q30. What is the status of my complaint made to the DG & IG of police , government of Karnataka on 10/12/2004 ? the copies of complaint was released at press meet at patrakartara bhavan Mysore on same day, even copies were given to police & intelligence personnel ?

Q31. Why no action , reply regarding the complaint till date ?

Q32. Our constitutional frame workers gave legal immunity privileges to certain constitutional functionaries , so that they are not burdened with frivolous court cases & can concentrate on their constitutional duties. But these privileges doesn't cover the individual actions of those public servants like rape , murder , dowry harassment , tax evasion , misuse of office , etc. but still law enforcement / police department is bound to send request to home ministry seeking permission & home ministry sits over files for months. This gives the accussed ample time to destroy evidences. Is it right & legal ?

Q33. Does legal immunity privileges cover their official actions alone ? if not what does it cover ?

Q34. What is the time limit for home ministry to give sanction for the prosecution of tainted constitutional functionaries ?

Q38. How many of them have attended frequent parties hosted by underworld dons in gulf countries , else where ?

Q39. How many MP , MLA , other people's representatives are wanted by police in various cases . but shown in the police records as absconding but in reality are attending the proceedings of the house as usual ?

Q40. When did smt. Sonia Gandhi became a citizen of india ? did she occupy any public office before naturalization ?

Q41. In india , how many MPs , MLAs , MLCs are of foreign origin or have a spouse of foreign origin ?

Q42. Does smt. Sonia Gandhi have citizenship of any other country ?

Q43. Did she occupy any public office while enjoying dual citizenship ?

Q44. How do you monitor public servants who have spouses of foreign origin & while they are on foreign tour , from national security perspective ?

Q45. Is mr. M.S SUBBA member of parliament a citizen of india ?

Q46. What is the status of complaint made by former union minister mr.subramanya swamy alleging that late P.M rajiv gandhi's family received money from foreign intelligence agencies ?

Q47. In many cases like mass riots involving certain political parties , when that culprit party comes to power all the cases involving it's partymen are withdrawn by the government orelse prosecution fails to prove it's case & prefers not to appeal. Just remember Bombay riot case involving shiv sainiks & others , when shiv sena – BJP came to power in Maharashtra , all the cases against it's partymen were withdrawn. Are these type of decisions by government just & legal ?

Q48.what damages has been done to india's national security due to mole in the PMO, as alleged by former union minister mr.natwar singh ?

Q49. What action by the government ?

Q50. How many Indians are in the custody of police / military in various foreign countries ?

Q51. How many foreigners are there in Indian prisons ?

Q52. How GOI is protecting the human rights of these prisoners ?

Q53. Is the government paying any compensation to victims of police failures , fix-ups , , who suffer in jail for years & acquitted by courts upon finding them as not guilty ?

Q57. I , as a citizen of india as my "fundamental duty" hereby do offer my conditional services to GOI & GOK to apprehend corrupt public servants. Are you ready to utilize my services ?

Q58. Police personnel are always in the forefront of containing crimes , mass fury , riots , etc. they suffer more & even their family members suffer threats from the criminal elements. Do the government provide insurance coverage to police & their family members on the lines of defense forces ?

Q59. What is the amount of coverage to a police constable & his family ?

Q60. Who makes the premium contributions ?

Q61. Do the government provide overtime allowance , food allowance to police who daily work beyond 8 hours of duty ?

Q62. Is the government giving any training to police personnel in public interaction , human rights ?

Q63. Is it right to post professionally trained police to sentry , orderly duties of ministers ?

Q64. What is the ratio of police personnel to total population in india since 1987 ?

Q65. IS THE GOVERNMENT GIVING ADEQUATE FOOD, MEDICAL CARE , CLOTHING , LIVING SPACE TO PRISON INMATES , AS REQUIRED BY A NORMAL HUMAN EING ACCORDING TO W.H.O NORMS ?

Q66. Is the forensic science department which conducts narcfo-analysis , lie-detector test , etc under the control of police department ?

Q67. Is it not right to put it under impartial control of NHRC or like bodies ?

Q68. Is the action of some police officers arranging compromise meetings & subtly insisting the poor to tow the line of rich or else face the consequences , is it right & legal ? this happens mostly in real estate matters.

Q69. Did government make any ransom payments to forest brigand veerappan during his various kidnappings ?

Q70. What action has been taken based on revealations by karim telgi during narco analysis about public servants involvement ?

Q71. How many cases of allegations against judges were made in the media about misuse of office , criminal acts by judges from munsiff court to supreme court of India ? since 1947 till date

Q72. are the enquiry report findings, action taken reports of such cases accessible to public ? if not why ?

Q73. what action has been taken against guilty judges ?

Q74. are the guilty judges legally prosecuted in all such cases ? or has it just ended with their resignation from services or his superior judge not allotting him any judicial work ?

Q75. why some high ranking judges are not legally prosecuted for their wrong doings ?

Q79. how do the judiciary monitor the net wealth growth of some judges including the wealth in the name of judge's family members ?

Q80. do all the judges file their annual income , wealth statements on sworn affidavits to the higher judiciary ? defaulters how many ?

Q81. how does the judiciary verifies those statements ?

Q82. is such statements made public , on web ?

Q83. when the judgement of a lower court is turned down by the higher court , what action is initiated against lower court judge for making unjust judgement & meating out injustice ?

Q84. when allegations of corruption , misuse of office , etc against judges are made , why the accussed – judges are not subjected to tests like "poly graph , lie detector , brain mapping , etc" , in the interest of justice & truth ?

Q85. judges are not employees of government , so they are ineligible to be the members of "Karnataka state government judicial department house building co-operative society". Then how come , many judges including supreme court judges are admitted as members of this society & allotted prime residential site worth crores of rupees for a few thousands by the said society at said society's – judicial layout , yelahanka , Bangalore ? while the ordinary members like peons , clerks in judicial department are waiting for a site since years , is not the whole thing grossly illegal ?

Q86. in more than 70% of cases before all courts in India , central government or state government or government agency is one of the parties. How many judges or their family members , have received out of turn , favourable allotments of sites , gas agency , petrol pumps , etc by the government ? is not such allotments illegal ? what action ?

Q87. when a person under police custody or judicial custody suffer 3rd degree torture by police , is not the judge of the respective court which is handling that tortured person's case responsible for it ?

Q89. registrar , Mysore district & sessions court , has called for the candidatures to various vacancies in that court from the public vide notification no : ADMN/A/10825/2003 dated 19/11/2003. Please furnish me the merit ranking list of selected candidates along with my merit ranking for the post of peon.

Q90. registrar , Bangalore city civil court , has called for the candidatures to various vacancies in that court from the public vide notification no : ADM-I(A)422/03 dated 19/05/2003. Please furnish me merit ranking list of selected candidates for the post of peon.

Q91. when a person doesn't get adequate food , medical care while under police custody or judicial custody , is not the respective judge dealing that person's case responsible for it ? what action ?

Q92. how judiciary is monitoring food & medical care to prisoners ?

Q93. numerous accussed persons are suffering in jail under judicial custody , for periods far exceeding the legally stipulated sentence periods. For example : a pick-pocketer is in jail for one year , the judge finds him guilty of offence & gives him 3 months sentence. What about the excess punishment of 9 months. Is not the judge responsible for the illegal , excess punishment of the convict ? what action against the judge in such cases ?

Q94. numerous innocents suffer in jail for years & finally the judge finds them as innocents & acquits them of the charges. What about the prison sentence , the innocent has already served ? is not the judge responsible for this illegal , unjust punishment to an innocent ? remedy ? what action against the judge ?

Q95. does the privileges of judges cover both their official actions & the actions arising out of misuse of office ?

Q96. does the privileges of judges cover both their official actions as judges & their personal actions as individuals ?

Q97. are the fundamental rights of citizens supreme or the privileges of judges , constitutional functionaries supreme ?

Q98. what is the criteria adopted for promotion of judges ?

Q99. what is the criteria adopted for appointment of advocates from bar , as the judges ?

Q100. what is the criteria adopted for appointment of retired judges , as governors of states , members or as chairman of commissions , etc ?

Q107. when common people / tax payers & even government employees are not getting proper health care from government at government hospitals. Is it right & just to provide premium health care to judges , constitutional functionaries at 5-star private hospitals in India , abroad , all at tax payer's expense ?

Q108. are the judges subjected to periodical health check-ups to ascertain their health , mental faculties & mental balance in the midst of all work pressures , emotional tensions ?

Q109. what is the criteria adopted by judiciary for accepting applications seeking public interest litigations ?

Q110. why numerous appeals for PIL by me , were not considered ?

Q111. what is the criteria adopted by judiciary , for appointing "amicus curie" in a case ?

Q112. why my appeal to honourable supreme court , to make me as an "amicus curie" in late P.M Rajiv Gandhi's assassination case , was not considered by the court ?

Q113. what is the criteria adopted by judiciary , for initiating suo-motto action ?

Q114. numerous cases of injustices are reported in the media daily , with supporting evidences . why not the judiciary take suo-motto action in all such cases ?

Q115. legal aid boards pre-judge the cases in the name of taking legal opinion , before providing legal aid to the needy ? is it not needy person's rights violation ?

Q116. is not the safety of witnesses , parties in cases responsibility of the court , both during hearing of the case & afterwards ?

Q117. is the use of 3rd degree torture by police on prisoners , during the police custody / judicial custody / prison sentence right ? what action ?

Q124. the appeals made to the honourable supreme court of India , copies of which are available at following web pages

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw/message/182 ,

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw/message/206 ,

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw/message/208 ,

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw/message/212 ,

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw/message/209 ,

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw

what are the status of those appeals ?

Q125. in the media , we have seen reports about judges committing crimes – rape , attempt to murder , swindling government money , untouchability practice , the disrespect to national flag , sale of judicial orders , bail , receipt of monetary gains by way of royalty for books , prime real estate purchase at discounted rate , taking round about long foreign tours along with family in the name of official work , etc. by this way , judges themselves are making contempt of court , constitution of India & citizens of India. How you are protecting the honour of the judiciary , constitution of India & citizens of India ? please answer.

Q126. Is the government giving any facilities / affirmative actions to policemen's family as being given to defense personnel , ex-servicemen & their families , like preferential site allotment , lpg agency , ration depot , reservation in college admission , soft bank loans , etc ?

Q126. if not , why ? after all , the contribution of police to national security is on par with defense forces.

Q127. is not some high police officials addressing their subordinates in singular term , abusing them with vulgar words wrong ?

Q128. is not some police personnel calling public with singular term, abusing public with vulgar words wrong ?

Q129. is it not the duty of prison authorities to protect the health, lives of prison in-mates ?

Q130.what action is taken against police personnel who wrongly charged an innocent person of criminal acts , resulting in his confinement in jail , finally acquitted by court as found to be innocent ?

Q131. is it not right to with hold salary , gratuity , pension to such guilty police personnel & pay it as compensation to victims of police failures & atrocities ?

Q132. does our Indian constitution legally permit a citizen of foreign origin naturalized by marriage to an Indian or naturalized by option , to occupy any constitutional office ?

Q133. during british rule in india & various other british colonies , criminal cases were foisted against our freedom fighters in India & other british colonies. After india's independence what happened to those cases ? did our Indian government close all such cases or did it continue with the prosecution ?

Q134. in how many cases GOI & other state government continued with the prosecution AGAINST OUR FREEDOM FIGHTERS ? why ?

Q135. what about the status of cases against shri.netaji subash Chandra bose ?

Q136. has GOI deported any freedom fighters to Britain or it's colonies , to face prosecution after India gained independence ? HAS GOI RECEIVED ANY REQUEST FROM BRITAIN TO THAT EFFECT ? if yes , why , whom ?

Q138 . the honourable union home secretary failed to give me information as per my rti request , he transferred my application to others , in turn they transferred the application to some others. Finally , complete truthful information was not given , why ? as the union home secretary has got copies of all those replies in response to transferred RTI application , will he send me a consolidated reply to my present RTI request ?

Q139. in a high profile case before the honourable delhi high court , we have seen how defense advocate mr. R.S.ANAND & prosecution advocate mr. I.U.KHAN made a secret pact to win the case in favour of rich criminal , totally manipulating prosecution witnesses , evidences & prosecution stand , totally making mockery of justice system . how you are ensuring the delivery of justice , there being numerous such advocates in practice ?

Q140. Smt. Sonia Gandhi is person of foreign origin , she wields enormous clout more than the Prime Minister himself over the government of India being the chair person of UPA. Is she legally permitted to summon confidential official records , minutes of the cabinet , to hold the cabinet meeting of union ministers ?

Q141. As per law , is she permitted to hold constitutional offices like prime minister of India or president of India , etc ?

Q.142. What are the fundamental rights of a citizen guaranteed under the constitution (Article 21) ?

Q143. What are the privileges conferred on legislators & parliamentarians by the constitution of India?

a) Inside the House b) Outside the House

Q144. What are privileges conferred on constitutional functionaries, like

Q148. Are the liberty & fundamental rights of the citizens guaranteed by the constitution, above the privileges of the constitutional functionaries or equal or below ?

Q149. Can the Indian legislatures & parliament be equated to the House of commons in England which is considered to be a superior court and court of records ?

Q150. Can the division of powers, namely the legislature, the executive and the Judiciary, be equated to the functioning of the House of commons and House of Lords in England ?

Q151. Can a citizen be said to have committed breach of privilege of the House or court and causing contempt of the house or court by raising the issues of accountability of constitutional functionaries ?

Q152. Can a Legislature or Parliament enact a new law, to circumvent or to nullify the Judicial orders with respect to wrongdoings by peoples representatives & executive ? does not it amount to infringement of Judicial powers & contempt of the court by the House.

Q153. Are the FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES of a citizen more important than constitutional duties of a constitutional functionary or equal in importance to it ?

Q154. Can a constitutional functionary commit crimes, anti-national activities in the name of constitutional duties, behind the legal veil of official's secret act & go unaccountable for his actions and go unpunished by his legal immunity privileges

Q155. Are the Legislators members of parliament, High court & Supreme court Judges and other constitutional functionaries not willing to codify their privileges for the reason that if codified their privileges would be curtailed and their action would be subjected to legal scrutiny. ?

Q156. By votes of citizens Legislators and parliamentarians get seats in the legislature and Parliament out of tax payer's money, they get their pay, perks & lead 5-Star luxurious lifestyles. Hence whether a vote of a citizen is above (More valid) or a seat of legislator or parliamentarian is above or more valid in a democracy ?

Q157. Judges & Constitutional functionaries are indirectly appointed by voters / tax payers. Out of tax payers money, they get their pay, perks & lead 5-star luxurious lifestyles. Hence, whether the vote of a citizen, fundamental duties of a tax payer is above (more valid) or a seat of judge / constitutional functionary is above (more

valid) in a democracy ?

Q158. If there is a vacuum in the Legislature or parliament, who is to fill up that vacuum till such time that the legislature or parliament acts provide a solution by performing its role by enacting proper legislation to cover the field (vacuum) ?

Q159. While it is an unhealthy practice for a Judge to claim to be a Judge in his own cause, is it not worse for the members of the legislature and parliament to be judges in their own cause ?

Q160. Are the Technicalities of the case more important to a judge or Justice to a citizen, protection of fundamental rights of citizen.?

Q162. Why not the Judges admit various cases of Injustices affecting public, as the Public Interest Litigation" ? In some cases, the Public or the person representing them is unable to afford the high cost of the case. Why not free legal aid is given ?.

Q163. What is the criteria for admitting a P.I.L. & giving free legal aid ?

Q164. Communication - free flow of information is the lifeline of a democracy. Why the constitutional functionaries are not honouring the Right to Information of Citizens ?

Q165. Recently , while assuming office as honourable chief justice of Karnataka , justice. P.D.DINAKAR , gave a blanket withdrawal of all internal departmental enquiries against approximately 200 judges , is it just & legal ? give me the names of accused judges & description of charges against them ?

Q166. does it not show that judges are more equal than others ?

Q167. who are involved in PF scam ? what action against guilty judges ?

Q168. Why you did not give information to me as per RTI Act inspite of appeal ? refer. F1/RTI/A91/2007.

PF SCAM SHAME SHAME TO CORRUPT JUDGES & POLICE IN INDIA

WHO WILL BELL THE CORRUPT FEW AMONG INDIAN JUDICIARY & INDIAN POLICE ?

Just a few months back , a district & sessions judge in mysore was arrested for swindling the court money to the tune of approx 20 lakhs , now comes the provident fund scam involving judges . these are only tip of the ice berg , there lies lot more scams beneath. Add to it , the recent raids of Karnataka lokayuktha on high ranking police officials who have amassed crores worth illegal wealth. Police officer extracts bribe from criminals for destroying prosecution's case , for manipulating evidences , to fix up innocents in cases while letting free the real criminals , to file B report , to close prosecution cases , to finish innocents in fake encounters , to apply 3rd degree torture on innocents , etc . where as a judge takes money for giving favourable judicial orders to the real criminal.

All these goes to prove false , the public perception that persons behind bars are the only criminals & those outside are good ones. There are poor innocent people wrongly convicted & behind bars & much more number of criminals outside. More shocking is that there are ruthless , cunning criminals in public offices as police , as judges & doing more harm to the society , people & the nation at large . these corrupt public servants are greater threat to india's national security & internal security than any terrorist outfits or Pakistan or china.

The honourable chief justice of India , union home minister & director general of police for Karnataka even failed to answer the open questionnaire in full with truthful answers , lest the truth comes out , lest the criminals in public offices are brought to book.

They even failed to accept my appeals as public interest litigations ( PIL ) or to accept my conditional offer of services in apprehending criminals , lest their cronies , criminals are caught red handed.

Is this the free India our freedom fighters , bapuji & others struggled for , sacrificed for ? there was a time when JUDGES , POLICE were considered as equivalent to GODS themselves , but now some corrupt JUDGES , POLICE themselves are proving that they are not human beings but worse than DEMONS. The criminal acts of corrupt majority is bringing disgrace to the honest few in judicial & police service & to the institution as a whole. We at e-voice of human rights watch salute , respect those honest few in judicial & police service and requests them to apprehend their corrupt colleagues at the earliest.

When the fence itself eats into the crop which it has to protect , when the doctor himself kills the patient whom he has to treat , when the mother supposed to protect her child kills it herself , when the king supposed to protect his subjects himself kills them , WHEN THE POLICE & JUDGE SUPPOSED TO GIVE JUSTICE , PROTECT HIS CITTIZENS , HIMSELF MEATS OUT INJUSTICE , where to appeal ? it is nothing but anarchy. These corrupt few are also bringing disgrace to the august institutions they occupy & are also making contempt of those very offices they hold & making contempt of citizens of India.

Who will dare to bell the fat , corrupt cats & save democracy in India.

CAN JUDGEMENT BE MANIPULATED IN INDIAN COURTS OF JUSTICE ?
- WHY NOT PRISON SENTENCE FOR GUILTY SUPREME COURT ADVOCATES ?
New Delhi, August 21 The Delhi High Court imposed a four-month ban on
senior advocate R K Anand and colleague I U Khan on Thursday for
interfering with judicial proceedings in the high-profile BMW
hit-and-run case. A fine of Rs 2,000 was levied as well.
On May 30, 2007, television channel NDTV caught both lawyers in a
"sting" operation, conniving with key prosecution witness Suniel
Kulkarni to get main accused Sanjeev Nanda off the hook.
A High Court Bench comprising Justices Madan B Lokur and Manmohan
Sarin found the two guilty of criminal contempt.
"The entire material leaves a bitter taste in the mouth about the
goings-on in the BMW case. There is no manner of doubt whatsoever that
there was complicity between Mr Khan and Mr Anand... There can be
absolutely no doubt that Mr Khan and Mr Anand were, somehow or the
other, more than mixed up in the BMW case," observed the court, which
had taken suo motu cognizance of the expose the day after it was aired.
"Mr Anand and Mr Khan are prohibited from appearing in this court
(Delhi High Court) or courts subordinate to it for four months from
today. However, they are free to discharge their professional duties
in terms of consultation, advice, conferences, opinions, etc," said
the Bench.
The court desisted from commenting on the conduct of Kulkarni, saying
it would not be "proper" to do so.
Though the verdict comes solely on basis of the CDs and transcripts of
the sting operation, the Bench said, "the unshakeable truth is that Mr
Anand is guilty of criminal contempt of court".
Contemplating a fit punishment, the Bench wondered how many in the
legal fraternity had had been taken by surprise to find Anand
indulging in such "sharp practices". "Mr Anand has held many
prestigious elective positions in the legal fraternity, including the
Bar Council of Delhi. He has also been a Member of the Rajya Sabha,"
noted the Bench.
The court said it knew Khan for his legal acumen and forensic skills —
"perhaps the reason why he was appointed Special Public Prosecutor in
the BMW case". High expectations over Khan fell apart when his conduct
"betrayed the trust that prosecution reposed in him... what he did was
perhaps beyond the realm of contemplation of the prosecuting agency".
Chastising the two for their misconduct, the Bench said: "We are not
dealing with a young lawyer who, driven by ambition and desire...
transgresses the limits or unwittingly or unknowingly commits criminal
contempt. We are dealing with senior advocates, who are expected to
conduct themselves as gentlemen and role models for younger members of
the Bar."
The court forwarded a recommendation that the two be "stripped of
their designations as senior advocates". The High Court Registrar
General will put up the court's recommendation before Chief Justice AP
Shah within a month.
In response to the verdict, the Delhi Bar Association president,
advocate Rajiv Khosla, said about 20,000 lawyers from district courts
were going on strike on August 22 in protest.
R K Anand
Began legal career in Delhi's Tis Hazari Court as a civil lawyer in
1967. Appointed government counsel in 1976. In 2000, JMM nominated him
to Rajya Sabha from Jharkhand. Appointed AICC observer for Assembly
polls in Himachal Pradesh in February 2003.
High-profile cases:
* In 1980, represented the late Indira Gandhi in a property litigation
filed by Maneka Gandhi after Sanjay Gandhi's death
* Narasimha Rao in the JMM bribery and the St Kitts case
* Chandraswami in the FERA violation case
* H K L Bhagat in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots case
* Former external affairs minister Natwar Singh's son Jagat Singh in
the murder/suicide of his wife Natasha Singh
I U Khan
One of the top five criminal lawyers in Capital. He was charging a fee
of only Re 1 in the BMW case. Began his career in late 1960s, and came
intio spotlight in 1980s.
* Defended Sushil Sharma in the tandoor murder case, Subash Gupta in
the Personal Point triple murder, former Youth Congress President
Romesh Sharma in several cases and Tony Gill in Jessica Lall murder case
When prosecution & defence lawyer together team up along with corrupt
police / public servants and manipulate evidences / records , the
court is helpless and will acquit the accussed for lack of evidences
eventhough the presiding judge is of impeccable integrity , honesty ,
he is help less. Add to this , if the presiding judge happens to be
corrupt & teams up with the criminal nexus , the result is devastating
, the rich criminal will get away & the innocent will suffer
punishment in some cases even death sentence.
Who will bell these few corrupt among the judiciary , bar , police &
public service ? why not prison sentence for two leading advocates
on criminal charges of contempt of court , destruction of evidences ?
are they above law ? why favouritism by court to the guilty in
awarding punishment to guilty two advocates as they happen to be
political influential ? will the court let a common man so leniently
for the same charges ? In the past cases dealt by these corrupt duo
advocates , there are possibilities that the same tactics of
manipulation of evidences , prosecution is done to win the cases , to
free the rich criminals , why not review of the cases dealt by these
corrupt advocates ?
The honest few among judiciary , bar , police & public service must
uphold our constitution , rule of law & bring to book their corrupt
colleagues.

CASH FOR JUDGEMENT
Chandigarh, August 22: Punjab and Haryana High Court Judge Nirmal
Yadav who has gone on leave after her name is said to have figured in
the statements of the main accused in the case involving the delivery
of cash at another High Court Judge's house, said today that she was a
"victim of a vilification campaign."
Speaking to The Indian Express at her Sector 24 residence here today,
Justice Yadav said that "some influential persons were trying to shift
the focus on her to save the real accused."
Justice Yadav denied that former Haryana Additional Advocate General
Sanjeev Bansal had talked to her on phone on August 13 when Bansal's
clerk "mistakenly" delivered a bag containing Rs 15 lakh to the
residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, another sitting Judge of the High
Court.
"Let any agency prove that I talked to Sanjeev Bansal on phone either
on that day or any day in the past one month," Justice Yadav said. "I
am ready to face all consequences if this allegation is found true. I
have had no dealings with Bansal. I have not received any money from
Bansal or any of his associates. I am sure I will get justice."
Justice Yadav said she had explained her position to High Court Chief
Justice T S Thakur and had "proceeded on leave." She said she would
not hear any case until her name is cleared.
Sources close to her said that during her meeting with Justice Thakur
yesterday evening, in which some other senior judges were also
present, Justice Yadav offered to proceed on leave to "maintain the
highest traditions of Indian judiciary." Justice Thakur told The
Indian Express that he had not asked Justice Yadav to proceed on leave
and that it was her own decision.
It is learnt that in her meeting with Justice Thakur, Yadav vehemently
denied any role in the entire role.
While acknowledging that she and some other members of her family had
bought a plot of 11.1 bighas of land (see accompanying story) at
village Rihun Pargana near Kumharhatti in Solan district of Himachal
Pradesh on August 14, Yadav is learnt to have denied that the money
for purchasing the land came from Bansal or Ravinder Singh, the Delhi
businessman, who is also named in the case.
"Can't a judge buy legal property? Let the police or any other
investigating agency prove that the money for the deal was provided by
Bansal or Singh," she is learnt to have told the Chief Justice. But
she is learnt to have acknowledged, in her meeting with the Chief
Justcie, that she knew Ravinder Singh. She is learnt to have said that
she came to know him through some other judges.
Meanwhile, highly placed sources in the High Court confirmed that
Chief Justice Thakur is awaiting the return of Chief Justice of India
KG Balakrishnan from Brazil to apprise him of the developments in the
case. The Chief Justice is learnt to have asked the administrative
committee, comprising senior judges, to monitor the case on a daily
basis.
The Rs 15-lakh delivery: Story So Far
•August 13: Parkash Ram, an assistant to Haryana's Additional Advocate
General Sanjeev Bansal, delivers a parcel containing Rs 15 lakh at the
residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur of the Punjab and Haryana High
Court. Justice Kaur calls the police.
•Rajeev Gupta, Bansal's friend and a property dealer, tells the police
that the money reached there by mistake and it was meant for Nirmal
Singh, another property dealer. Chandigarh Police decline to hand over
the cash. Bansal is questioned
•August 16: A case is registered against Bansal, Parkash Ram and
Delhi-based hotelier Ravinder Singh who allegedly organised the money
•Bansal resigns as Addl AG and surrenders on August 19
•August 21: Rajeev Gupta, the property dealer who claimed the money
was meant for Nirmal Singh, is arrested. The Inspector General of
Police sends a report to the Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High
Court. The report says that the money was meant for another judge.
•August 22: Justice Nirmal Yadav proceeds on leave
Caught in controversy is Solan plot that judge, 16 others purchased
CHANDIGARH, SOLAN, August 22: On August 14, according to revenue
records, a plot measuring 11.1 bighas in Solan was purchased by
Justice Nirmal Yadav and others for Rs 5, 52, 500. Details of the
transaction, obtained by The Indian Express, show that the land was
purchased by her and 16 others from six persons, all residents of
village Rihun Pargana, near Kumharhatti in the Solan district of
Himachal Pradesh.
This purchase is said to have figured in the meeting between Justice
Yadav and the High Court Chief Justice yesterday. Justice Yadav is
said to have told the Chief Justice: "Can't a judge buy legal
property? Let the police or any other investigating agency prove that
the money for the deal was provided by (Sanjeev) Bansal or Ravinder
Singh."
The purchasers and sellers obtained permission from the Himachal
Pradesh Government under Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy
Act. Solan Naib Tehsildar N S Chauhan has confirmed on record that
that the deal had been registered as per the details we have.
The land was sold by residents of village including Baldev; Narinder
Kumar; Surinder Kumar; Rajinder Kumar; Bimla Devi and Amar Singh. The
sellers have given a General Power of Attorney to Surinder Kumar (one
of the partners among the sellers), who executed a sale agreement in
favour of the buyers.
Those named as purchasers (partners) in the land deal include Suruchi,
a resident of House no. 3, Sector 14, Gurgaon; Trisha Chaudhary; Ram
Niwas; Rajender Yadav; Chiranjeev; Latika; Deepak; Sunita; Vivek;
Capt. NT Puri; Devinder Singh; Shakuntla; Kuldip Singh Yadav; Ajay
Yadav; Sushank Puri; Mohit (all residents of house no. 1111, Sector
11, Panchkula) and Punjab and Haryana High Court Justice Nirmal Yadav.
Three booked in judge bribery case
Haryana Addl Advocate General among booked
Chandigarh, August 16: Three persons, including Additional Advocate
General of Haryana Sanjeev Bansal, were on Saturday booked for an
attempt to bribe a Punjab and Haryana High Court Judge.
The other two are Bansal's munshi Parkash, who had carried Rs 15 lakh
to the residence of High Court judge Nirmaljit Kaur on Wednesday
night, and Ravinder Singh, a Delhi-based businessman who has a hotel
in Karol Bagh.
The munshi was taken into custody while a police party has been
despatched to Delhi to nab Singh.
Assistant Superintendent of Police Madhur Verma said the amount was
supposed to be handed over to some other public servant but was
mistakenly delivered at Kaur's house.
An FIR was lodged after Kaur complained to the police. She also
reported the matter to the Chief Justice.
Police said Singh had allegedly paid Bansal a huge amount to get
settled a criminal case pending in the High Court. The case is due to
come up for hearing on Wednesday.
Earlier, Singh had claimed the amount was pertaining to a property
deal he had struck with a resident of Panchkula. The money was
supposed to be delivered to one Nirmal Singh and was mistakenly
delivered at the judge's house.
Verma, however, said the preliminary investigation had ruled out the
possibility of the amount being related to any property deal.
"Bansal failed to give a detailed account of the cash. He produced
some papers pertaining to some property in Panchkula but that did not
carry any weight. Our investigations caught him on the wrong foot and,
therefore, we booked him along with two others under the Prevention of
Corruption Act and criminal conspiracy," he added.
Bansal has been handling several high-profile cases. He is one of the
dozen-odd Additional Advocate Generals appointed by the Haryana
Government about two years ago.
Corrupt judge in Allahabad High Court
Posted By: Rajeev
State: Uttar Pradesh District: Allahabad City: Allahabad
* Conversation with Vigilance Officer – Audio Wave File
* Conversation with Registrar General – Audio Wave File
* Letter that CBI has forwarded to Registrar General – Tif Format
If the Judges go corrupt, then it is GOD who will give one justice
when one go to heaven or hell. It is a Irony that I filed a complaint
against a District and Session Judge who later promoted to High Court
of Allahabad. I wish the God will serve HIS justice to Hon'ble Justice
Umeshware Pandey, now enjoying at High Court and selling (Mis)Justice
at Rs 100000 per page!!
Here I am elaborating what had happened. In 1994, two people name
Parashram Agarwal and Mohan Lal Agarwal wanted to grab my father's
property and in March 1994 they beat him and pulled his legs( just
imagine the pain) making him handicapped for life. Then in court those
guys were merely sentenced for 6 months in Jail, but they did not went
for the jail for single day or hour and appealed to Sessions Court and
then the corrupt Judge Umeshwar Pandey took the bribe of Rs 200000 in
Criminal Revision number 13/2000 from Parashram Agarwal and Mohan Lal.
It is a shame on Umeshwar Pandey that he cannot see a Handicapped man
suffering for last 9 years and even then not given the justice.
Umeshwar Pandey has taken this bribe via his Steno name some G. D. Gupta.
It is the habit of Parashram and MohanLal to record the conversation
while giving bribes on hidden audio recorder and the same cassette can
be recovered if the authority try. It is been 8 months since I have
informed various authorities by registered letters and phone calls
from USA for no action till date.
I have spoken to Mr Jagmohan Paliwal who was posted as Vigilance
Officer for no action till date and the recording attached is from
Sept 2002.
Similarly I have spoken with Mr. K. S. Rakhra who was posted as
Registrar General but no action till date, and the recoding shown is
from Sept 2002 too.
Even CBI has forwarded my letter to Registrar General, but no action
is taken on that one too.
I have emaild my plea to few High court Judges too for no response.
I just hope GOD is there who will give some justice. But the corrupt
Judges should stop imitating as GOD they are devil actually.
The only solution can be people make a limit. How much money a person
needs. I often think about a story that a saint refused to take the
food as he already got the food for today and he do not want to
collect for tomorrow. But I don't know why people want to generate
money for 7 generations. If a careful analysis and investigation is
done Umeshwar Pamdey has Black money worth 3 generations. I guess
instead of Lakhs and Carore now corruption should be measured in
generations.
Education is important. People need to understand the meaning of
freedom truly. IF I say boldly India is still not free. People have
mentality that they need to pay to Government officials for work. This
mentality has to be removed.
Thanks
Rajeev
HC suspends judge over corruption complaints
AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat High Court has suspended a fast track court
judge in Rajpipla after receiving several complaints of corruption and
favouritism against her.
Rajpipla fast track court Judge DL Desai was suspended on Thursday
evening after a primary inquiry held by the court's vigilance
department said that the complaints against her had substance. Further
inquiry against her will be conducted by the department. Besides the
complaint of favouritism in Rajpipla, where she was presently posted,
the Desai was also accused of similar charges and issuing certificates
without proper verification in Bharuch, where the she was discharging
her duty as a principal district judge, the High Court authorities said.
The HC administration seems to be seriously taking the issue of
corruption prevailing in Gujarat's judiciary, as Desai's is the fourth
suspension in last three months. Earlier in May, a judge in Surat's
court, AN Vinjhola was suspended after similar complaints against him.
The court administration also found him in possession of property out
of proportion considering his known sources of income. Last month, two
judges were suspended on charges of corruption. The Ahmedabad city
civil JudgeNM Thakor and KV Kakkad were also suspended by the HC
after holding preliminary inquiry into complaints against them.
All the four suspended judges are now facing departmental inquiry.

INDIAN JUDICIARY UNDER RTI PURVIEW

The corrupt among public servants always give a ruse , reason to escape from accountability. Recently government of Karnataka under president's rule has enacted a rule limiting the number of informations sought in RTI application to 3 . already bureaucrats are successful in exempting official file notings from RTI purview. These file notings are the basis on which official decisions are taken by superiors , so if one wants to know the intention behind an official decision it is imperative to know all the notings.

Police apply 3rd degree torture on accussed , ask questions for hours in the name of extracting truth , the same police are afraid to answer questions lest the truth come out.

In the courts of law , numerous questions are asked , cross examination done to extract truth . if one remains silent it amounts to confession / agreeing to all charges leveled. In courts of law , during cross examination one must give straight forward answers , one cann't give vague answers nor state excuses for not answering a question. If one doesn't give straight forward answers that also is considered as agrreing to the charges levelled. The courts go to any length to extract answers to it's questions , take for example rape cases in the backdrop of our Indian tradition. In the courts of law , the rape victim - woman who has already suffered injustice , shame is made to depose before male judges , lawyers who are total strangers and made to repeatedly explain how the crime of rape was committed. So once again the victim is made to suffer more shame in the society. For the courts answers to questions , cross examination , legal procedures is more important than honour of woman. The very same judges are afraid to answer questions , cross examination under one pretext or the other lest the truth come out.

Even our people's representatives – MPs , MLAs , etc are afraid to speak out truth , to honour RTI act citing legal privileges , etc. in India , during appointment of persons to government service back ground check & clearance by police is mandatory & during appointment into sensitive defense , space , atomic energy establishments , etc apart from police verification , investigation by intelligence agencies is a must. No such thing for our MLAs , MPs . However now criminalization of politics is almost in India , some of the accussed are drafting laws like IPC , Indian defense rules , police code , purviews of judiciary , etc. they are drafting laws to legalise their crimes. The election commission of India is not properly verifying the affidavits of candidates , also the vigilance authorities , lokayukthas are not properly verifying the affidavits of sitting MLAs , MPs , etc.

More than RTI ACT , to seek information is part of every Indian citizen's fundamental rights & human rights , RTI ACT is just fulfilling that right partly & fixing a time frame. Nobody , no constitutional functionary is higher than Indian citizens , nobody's privileges or any laws prevailing over the fundamental rights & duties of Indian citizens is constitutional , just or legal . The shame is that even after 60 years of independence , FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS & DUTIES OF INDIAN CITIZENS is observed more in breach than implementation , by our public servants including the judiciary .

Hereby , we urge all the public servants – judges , police , people's representatives to honour RTI ACT , to honour Indian citizen's fundamental & human rights and to facilitate them to perform their fundamental duties. The silence of public servants to the questions asked or vague answers , ruses by public servants amounts to confessions , agreeing to the questions , charges leveled & crimes committed .

Let the TRUTH prevail.

Judiciary under RTI Act, says parliamentary panel

New Delhi, April 29
A parliamentary committee today held that judiciary comes under the purview of the Right to Information law with regard to all activities of administration except "judicial decision making." "Except the judicial decision making, all other activities of administration and the persons included in it (judiciary) are subject to RTI Act," said the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Law and Justice.

The opinion of the committee headed by E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappanan comes against the backdrop of a raging controversy over whether the judiciary comes under the RTI purview. Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan had recently said the CJI is a constitutional authority and does not come within the purview of the RTI Act.

The committee, which went into the demands of grants for the personnel ministry and discussed the interpretation of Section 2 (h) of the RTI Act, that is, definition of public authority, said the provision is very clear that all constitutional authorities come under the definition of public authority. The committee had examined in detail every clause of the RTI Act, 2004 and was conscious of the fact that all wings of the state, executive, legislature and judiciary, are fully covered under this Act since all organs of the state are accountable to the citizens of India in a democratic state. "It is more so since the judiciary is having a dual role as (i) administrative function and (ii) judicial decision making.

History of Corruption in Indian Judiciary since Independence: 1947 - 2003

1949: Mr. Justice Sinha only Judge impeached; courtesy Good Judges & Constitution Framers: Our Fore-Fathers represented by Constituent Assembly of India framers of Constitution of India then in 1949 (year before Consitution came into existence) impeached Mr. Justice Sinha; finding him "guilty of improper exercise of Judicial functions, the cumulative effect of which was to lower the dignity of his office and undermine the confidence of the public in the administration of justiceâ€¦" [008.07].
Such/ similar acts/ behaviours by whom-so-ever including Judges is since 1971 is covered as an act of Criminal Contempt of Court [041.05 ]. Not a single Judge is either Impeached or hauled-up for Contempt till 1991.
Peoples' Inner Hope Courts to maintain their Majesty & Dignity will prosecute 1000 Judges in context, who have tarnished & undermined the Fair image of Judiciary.
Let Judges relish Jail for months if not years ; to asses personally the convinences-N-comforts provided even to innocent citizens or persons who were not having Rs. 100 to give as Bail. Then they will be in better position to Transform Jails into Reformation Centres. Jailing corrupt Judges by Judges , we hope will instill confidence of people in Courts & law. Who-is-who of India then only will scare to get into any scam nor Criminals will think of becoming Legislators.

1991-93: Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami ( son-in-law of Chief Justice Mr. K. Veeraswami [049.04 ] ) : SAWANT COMMITTEE REPORThad held he is guilty of several charges. Supreme Court of India also upheld guilty of 3-4 charges ; & recommended to Parliament for further action. Parliamentarians failed in their Duty to Impeach the Sitting Judge of Supreme Court Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami ; not rising to the Heights of Eminent Constitution makers ; but chose to have unholy alliance with Corruption in Judiciary vis-a-vis Legislature & Government.[008.00 ].
Supreme Court which upheld Charges of Mis-Behaviour also , we opine , failed to prosecute him under Contempt of Court Act & relevant Laws . It also failed " To Do Complete Justice" by invoking Article142 . Criminal Judge was allowed to go scot-free; both by Parliament & Supreme Court !
Good precedent for other Judges ? If so What kind of message to we-innocent-Citizens ? For almost complete proceedings in SC & Parliament: [008.00 ]

1995 A.M. BHATTACHARJEE: The chief justice of the Bombay High Court was forced to resign in 1995 after it was found that he had received Rs.70 lakh as book advance from a publishing firm known to have links with the underworld.

1996 AJIT SENGUPTA: The Calcutta High Court judge made it a routine to issue ex parte, ad interim stay orders on anticipatory bail pleas from smugglers having links with the Mumbai underworld. He was arrested in 1996 for FERA violations after retirement

1994 to 1997: A.M. AHMADI: When he was Chief Justice of India (October 1994-March 1997), his daughter, a lawyer in the Delhi High Court, caused eyebrows to be raised for getting "special" treatment from certain judges. When some members of the bar sought a resolution banning lawyer relatives of judges from staying in the same house, the CJI got members to defeat the motion.

2000 A.S. ANAND: As Chief Justice of India. (a) He was accused of using his position to get the subordinate judiciary to rule in favour of his wife and mother-in-law in a suit that had been barred by limitation for two decades.For more: [049.05] [049.05A] [049.05B] [049.05C] [049.05D] [049.05E ] called as TANGLED PLOT. Also read Ram Jethmalani's " BIG EGOS, small men ". (b) Supreme Court , while he was CJI,directed a CBI probe after a dispute arose over his age in 2000. The investigation report was not made public.This arose due to scan copy published in Ram Jethmalani's " BIG EGOS, small men ".

2002: SEX FOR ACQUITTAL
In November 2002, Sunita Malviya, a Jodhpur-based doctor, alleged that a deputy registrar of the Rajasthan High Court had sought sexual favours for himself and for Justice Arun Madan to "fix" a case in her favour. Justice Mr.Â· Arun Madan . Case of Lady Sunita Malviya.STATUS: A committee set up by former CJI G.B. Pattanaik found prima facie evidence against Madan, who does not attend court anymore. Judge Resigned

CASH-FOR-JOB :Three judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court sought the help of disgraced PPSC chief R.P. Sidhu to ensure that their daughters and other kin topped examinations conducted by the commission . Judges are M.L. Singh , Mehtab Sing Gill & Amarbir Singh
STATUS: Two inquiry panels indicted the judges. Gill and Amarbir Singh have resigned M.L. Singh continues, though no work is allotted to him.

2002-03: 3 Judges Mysore Sex Scandal ( alleged ) : On Sunday, November 3, 2002, three judges of the Karnataka High Court, along with two women advocates, allegedly got involved in a brawl with a woman guest at a resort. The police arrived but reportedly didn't take action. Judges are N.S. Veerabhadraiah , V. Gopalagowda &Â· Chandrashekaraiah .STATUS: The three-judge inquiry committee appointed by the CJI filed its report. Gave clean chit.

E(I)nquiry-in-camera or In-House Inquiry was & is contrary to Law . Is ultra vires Article 14 of Constitution of India: " The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India"
Following Questions / Issues, inter alia , arise
( a ) Enquiry in-camera was held contrary to the observations made by, Constituent Assembly of India in 1949. In its' Impeachment Order had held thus:"While we are alive to the desirability, in the interests of the public, of investigating charges against a Judge in open court, we held the Enquiry in-camera in view of the allegation made in the affidavits and the circumstances of the case. This mode of proceeding should not, however, be regarded as a precedent." [008.07 ].
( b) In the case of similar In-House Inquiry held under the Orders of Chief Justice of India in Jusice V. Ramaswami's case , Justice Ramaswami had held that " Inquiring Committee" as well as " Inquiry" have no basis & force of law. It is reflected in the Report , which was read-out by CJI to Advocates & publicised , submitted by 3 Judges Committee thus" Indeed Justice Ramaswami had made it clear to the Chief Justice that he did not recognise any such Jurisdiction in any body or authority."
(c) It will not be out-of place to mention here that Two of "Three Judges Committee " appointed by CJI in Re. V. Ramaswami's case are alleged to be involved in Judges Plot 4 Plot.[014.00]. It is like Criminal investigating another criminal .
( d ) If so how sure can we be that " 3 Judges Committee " appointed to invetigate " 3 Judges Mysore Sex Scandal " were un-biased or were above Board & have presented an accurate Report ?

Queries to Supreme Court , Parliament of India & Central Government
In Re. Judges' Mysore Sex Scandal
( a)" Will the Supreme Court Publicise Report of " 3 Judges Committee " ( all & sundry material); morefully to know whether any evidence adduced by many in support of Scam is informed to CJI & Supreme Court ?
(b) What is the Guarantee that despite prima facie evidence Judges of Supreme Court which consists of Few corrupt Judges seved in Karnataka are not inclined to take stern action ?
(c) Investigation of a Crime comitted by Minister or anyone lies within Executive Domain like the case Justice K.Veeraswami, in this case CBI . Is it not a case of hushing-up & messing-up of " 3 Pillars of Constitution " ?.
(d) How long will you try keeping suppressed Crimes of Judges of Supreme Court & High Courts when Union Law Minister Mr. P. Shiva Shankar , on 28th Nov.1987 said " Supreme Court is filled with FERA violators & Bride Burnersâ€¦" ( AIR 1988 SC 1208 ). When Chief Justice Of India Justice E.S. Venkataramaiaha admits that "in every High Court there are 3-4 Judges who are out every evening to Party in Foreign Embassiies or at Advocates' placesâ€¦drinkâ€¦dineâ€¦" (1990 Cr LJ 2179 ) [041.09].
(e) 20% of Judges are corrupt , indirectly said Chief Justice of India Mr. Justice S.P. Bharucha , in other words admitted that 80% of Judges of India are not corrupt & are above board to be bribed or influnced ? Then why cases are not filed against 20% of Judges ?

LOSS of Confidence in Judiciary : The Actions & Inactions of Supreme Court trying to suppress crimes of Judges has resulted in We, the People of India losing confidence in Courts & given rise to a Question whether at all People of India's Fundamental & Statutory Rights are safe in present set of Judges & Courts and Laws Governing thereof ?

Conscience of Judiciary Shaken: Supreme Court of India: "Police Raj" it said when Judges all over India went on a kind of strike; for the reason that a District Judge in liquor prohibited GujaratState in 1991; drunk & misbehaved , police acted as per law or so. Conscience of Judiciary was shaken the Court claims. What was it to do with Judges all over India? Have they ganged-up as One to help each other & continue crimes but still go unpunished? Punish Dutiful Police?

"Police Raj" to "Judges Tyranny": Judges serving all over India have formed an Assocition called " All India Judges Association ". At the time when One Party System in Parliament managed by Congress was to give way to Multi-Party System (1989 & 1991 General Elections); Supreme Court gave Judgments in 1992 & 1993 upholding that Judges of subordinate courts of India are not Employees. They are like Ministers / M.L.A.s but not on par of Civil Servants [037.02][037.02A ]. Inter alia Court said Central Govt. should set-up " All India Judicial Services " & " National Judicial Pay Commission ". Supreme Court continuously monitored to see that Pay Commission (FNJPC) is constituted but failed to monitor setting-up of All India Judicial Services [055.02 ]. What Judges want is more Liberty / Perks / Powers but no liabilities / Duties. Un-bridled they want to be as Judges of Supreme Court & High Court. FNJPC was also given power to give Interim Relief to Judges. Non setting-up of NationalJudicialAcademy [008.15 ] & All India Judicial Services is nothing but Fraud on Constitution & Supreme Court

Criminal Politicians Vs Criminal Judges : Hats off for the Judgment of Supreme Court striking-down of Parliamentary Act amending Representatives of Peoples Act. Court said Come Clean Mr. Politicians in relation to diclosure of their Criminal , Financial & other such antecedents so as to help electorate of India to decide whether to vote for good or bad person in elections. But this 50 years belated Judgment came as Bolt from Blue to politicians. In this perod Aliens, Anti-nationals, Criminals & all sundries had a field Day.

But then What about Criminal / Corrupt / Judgment-for-Sex Judges ?: The Supreme Court was unanimous in the Judgment of corrupt politicians. Parliament is not unanimous to Bridle Judges or judiciary. Nor is the Supreme Court ready to find ways & means to Tame / Terminate / Jail the Corrupt / criminal / Judgment-for-Sex Judges. Such inactions of Supreme Court or High Court is nothing short of giving leverage to such of them. It looks as though Supreme Court on its own is eroding faith of Public in Judiciary as a whole. Like Termites these Judges are Constitutional-Enemies-Within-India who are bent upon to disseminate corruption among other Good Judges.

In the first step in the fight against judicial nepotism, the Law Ministry wrote to the Bar Council of India last month asking it to ensure that lawyers don't appear in cases before judges who are close relatives. However, it appears to have ignored the wider problem of what is called Son Stroke or Uncle Judge, where judges have close relatives practising in the same court.

NDTV discovered that this trend, where two judges or a group of judges have children practising in each other's courts, is widespread. While not everyone takes advantage of what has been described as a mutual cooperative society, many of them do. This problem first surfaced in 2003, when the Bar Council of India demanded the transfer of all judges whose relatives practised in the same courts.

A year later, BK Roy, then Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, issued an administrative order barring a group of 10-12 judges from hearing any case pleaded by each other's relatives.

He quoted eminent jurist HM Seervai: "Experience shows that an impression is created in the public, however unjustified it may be, that it would be advantageous to engage a judge's son as an advocate."

"It was generally believed that A, B, C and D (all judges) constituted a mutual co-operative society, in the sense was believed that each of the four judges (A, B, C and D) would protect the sons of the three other judges."

The order sparked off a protest by judges in Punjab who took mass leave. Justice BK Roy was subsequently transferred, and since then, the order has been ignored.

"Some relatives misuse their connections more blatantly than others, but the problem remains in principle. An especially acute feature of problem of nepotism as it exists here is that apart from relatives of high court judges, children of sitting Supreme Court judges from this region also practise here at Chandigarh."

"The advantages, the benefits that accrue to them from their connections is well known to all and is fully exploited," said Anupam Gupta, Senior Advocate, Punjab & Haryana High Court.

Recently an MP raised the issue of judicial nepotism again and claimed that out of 490 judges of the various High Courts and the Supreme Court, relatives of 131 judges are practising in the same court.

Limited directive

Finally, four long years after the issue was first raised by the Bar Council, the Law Ministry issued a directive. But it was confined to saying that no lawyer shall plead a case before a judge who is a close relative.

It completely skirts the issue of close relatives of a judge practising in the same court - the Uncle Judge or Son Stroke syndrome.

"There are complaints from all over the country that judges' children are practising in the same high court and that is causing grave problem in regard to handling of cases and the judges favouring and one judges son appearing before another judge," said M N Krishnamany, President, SC Bar Association.

Judges are, in fact, expected to follow a code of conduct which points out that: "Close association with individual members of the Bar, particularly with those who practise in the same court, shall be eschewed."

But is this distance really possible?

"If your son, brother or sister is practising in the same court, you can't eschew close association with your son, daughter or brother."

"Therefore, you should not be a judge in the same court; you should opt to be transferred to some other court where a close relative is not practising," said Prashant Bhushan, Member, Committee on Judicial Accountability.

However, as figures show, this is clearly not the trend.

In the Punjab & Haryana High Court, the relatives of eight sitting judges plead cases, while in Delhi High Court, the close relatives of nine sitting judges are practising lawyers.

Also senior lawyers feel that the children of judges are often favoured.

"That instances have come that a relation of a judge having joined only three four years in the practise suddenly his briefs are huge in number so that is what it is under scrutiny because he takes advantage of his position," said Jaganath Patnaik, President, Bar Council of India.

"It is very clear also as I know personally so many judges in the High Courts their children are practising and are being pampered also," said M N Krishnamani, President, SC Bar Association.

The public impression is that in order to get a favourable order, it's better to hire a close relative of a judge to plead your case.

Now the questions that remain to be answered are can the Bar Councils keep a check on this practise and is the Law Ministry seriously concerned about ending nepotism?

JUDICIAL PROPRIETY AND TEHELKABy: Rajeev Dhavan India needs a policy of embargoing post-retirement jobs for judges whilst increasing their retiring age.
THE JUDICIARY is in the news in ways that do not do it credit. Beginning with the `defeated'

Justice V. Ramaswamy impeachment in the early 1990s, the last decade portrays scandals. These include the Bombay Pay-off Scandal of 1990, the controversy over the Bombay High Court Chief Justice Bhattacharjee receiving large "foreign" royalties in 1995, controversies, however founded or unfounded, over Justices Punchi and Anand - both Chief Justices of India - and Justice Bharucha's declaration that 20 per cent of judges are corrupt. The year 2002 has been a bad year. In Punjab, High Court judges are accused of having received favours from the Chairman of the Public Service Commission. In Rajasthan, the allegations countenance a High Court judge and his Deputy Registrar soliciting sexual favours. In Karnataka, allegations canvass compromising sexual conduct involving High Court judges. In Patna, there are serious allegations of corrupting the legal process by lawyers and the registry. Public confidence is shaken.
Judges reign and rule - with little external effective oversight over their conduct. Judicial independence cannot encompass judicial lawlessness, rampant corruption or conduct unbecoming. Justice Ramaswamy's impeachment suffered defeat in Parliament. The Supreme Court's Committee opined he could not be denied work. In Bombay, resignations took place. Using the `transfer' policy - now abandoned - does not satisfactorily deal with serious allegations against judges. Corruption is transferred, not dealt with. In the mid-1990s, the Supreme Court felt that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) could use his prestige to persuade judges to resign or not attend court, But, such an approach eludes results if the delinquent tells the CJI to mind his own business.
Witness the cases of Hastings and Clairbourne in America where judges refused to demit office until impeachment - in one case, even though the judge was imprisoned! Informal methods have failed; and do not command confidence in India.
An intermediate method has to be created so that judges are answerable and can be disciplined without compromising their independence. But, it is not just a question of disciplining judges; but, also of dealing with complaints against them in a swift and effective way. Such mechanisms exist for the lower judiciary, but not for High Court and Supreme Court judges. From the supercession controversy of 1973 when three judges were superceded for the post of CJI, there have been calls for a National Judicial Commission both to (a) make judicial appointments (which after the 1982, 1993 and 1998 judgments are - and, that too, not quite satisfactorily - in the hands of a conclave of Supreme Court judges) and (b) deal with complaints, corruption and misconduct. But, ongoing suggestions for a National Commission have fallen on fallow ground. Having wrested the patronage of appointment, the judges have dragged their feet on issues of judicial discipline except to produce unenforceable codes of conduct. What are required are constitutional and statutory amendments.
Recent history shows that where there is a will, constitutional amendments are possible. But, there is a lack of political and judicial will to introduce changes. Today, judges collectively and in judicial orders make all kinds of suggestions on their pay, salary, perks and other things. But no consensus suggestion to interrogate judicial indiscipline emerges with credible clarity. Individually India's Chief Justices provide evasive and contradictory answers.
In the midst of all this comes the controversy over the commendable resignation of Justice Venkataswami who was the sole Commissioner of the Tehelka Commission. Three issues arise. The first is: what went wrong? Something did. Sometimes judges do hold two post-retirement posts - without conflict or demur. But, the Tehelka Commission was not just an inquiry but an inquisition in which the Government had a massive political stake. The proposal to give another assignment to Mr. Venkataswami whilst he investigated Tehelka and its discontents should never have been made. The next slip up was Chief Justice Bharucha's recommendation behind which the Government seeks refuge. No less, the offer of appointment should have been declined. This is not a case of conspiracy, corruption or misconduct. Mr. Venkataswami integrity is beyond dispute.
The famous Pinochet case (1991) was re-heard because Lord Hoffman had broad links with a charity which, though not before the 'Lords', had a stake in the cause. In the Curative Petition case (2002), the Indian Supreme Court drew sustenance from the `Pinochet' example on the premise that justice must not only be done but always appear to be done. This sets the tone. Mr. Venkataswami has led by example. Purity is as important as cleanliness. At least one present judge of the Supreme Court declined an above board invitation to a seminar from an American university on the basis that it was unacceptable that anyone other than the Government of India should pay for such trips. This sets a standard.
The second issue that arises out of Tehelka is whether Mr. Venkataswami can simply be replaced by another judge. There is a stateable case that he cannot. Section 8A of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952, was amended in 1971 to permit a Commission to continue if a vacancy arose in a multi-member Commission. The assumption of continuity would survive because a member or members would continue. But, section 8A is inapplicable for a single-member Commission or where an entire Commission ceases to exist. It becomes non-existent (non est) and ceases to function (functus officio). Continuity is broken. Replacing Commissions afresh contrives its own politics. There is an even chance that any replacement appointment would be challenged to the discomfiture of any new appointee. This does not mean that the records of the Commission are not available for public use. So far, the only real public interest part of the Commission's work was over the military deals - which was heard in camera. These can be examined by a Joint Parliamentary Committee as raw evidence to interrogate lapses. The other aspect of the Commission's inquiry investigates Tehelka's journalistic conduct and wild, unfounded allegations that Tehelka tried to destabilise the stock exchange and personally benefit Tehelka's people and financiers. A lot of this is humbug. The `journalistic' ethics issue does not need a Commission's wisdom, but along with the accountability of the electronic media should be generally examined by public discourse. There are enough legal provisions to deal with `destabilising' frauds; but, the Government knows that they do not have a credible leg to stand on. On this basis, the Tehelka Commission needs to be wound up; but the `defence deals' examined by Parliament.
The third issue relates to the desirability of post-retirement appointments for judges. There is a dilemma here. Although Inquiry Commission reports generally gather dust, there is a public faith that only judges should head such inquiries - indeed, that is what made the T.T. Krishnamachari and Kairon inquiries of the 1950s credible. The answer lies in less inquiries and carefully chosen incumbents. Today, an inquiry is a general panacea to avoid any public allegation. The Commission process has been devalued. Several statutes - such as the Human Rights and others - necessitate judicial appointments. Such jobs cannot be multiplied as inducements.
India needs a policy on embargoing post-retirement jobs for judges whilst increasing their retiring age. The Public Commission procedure came to the fore in 1921 after the Marconi scandal around 1918 because Parliament could not be wholly trusted. Parliament needs to be more rigorous and credible - even though the nation was let down by the Bofors Joint Committee which wrongly absolved the, then, Prime Minister and others in 1987.The Indian judiciary has to confront its public image. India's judges
are massively powerful. They both compensate bad governance as well as fulfil the judicial quest for power. Judges may err in their judgments. But, if confidence in the Judiciary abates, Indian governance is in peril.

CRIMES COMMITTED BY LAW COURTS IN INDIA – charge sanjay dutt with TADA

- An appeal to honourable supreme court of india

hereby, We appeal to the honourable supreme court of India to review the sentence given to cine actor mr.sanjay dutt. He is charged under illegal possession of arms , the stand of prosecution is biased . the culprit cine actor kept the arms knowing fully well for what purpose it is being kept , he had had regular contacts with anti-national underworld elements. Still he is not charged under either TADA or MOCA WHY ? WHERE AS ORDINARY CRIMINALS WHO HAVE DONE LESSER QUANTUM OF CRIME THAN HIM ARE CHARGED WITH TADA & PUNISHED SEVERALLY. WHY THIS DOUBLE STANDARDS BY THE JUDICIARY ? HEREBY , hrw also appeals to honourable supreme court of india to make public the transcript of underworld don abu salem's polygraph test , did sanjay dutt had any links with abu salem or other anti national elements ? how many film stars , sportspersons & politicians have regular contacts with underworld elements more specifically dawood ibrahim & chota rajan and how many of them have attended parties hosted by them in gulf countries ?

Indian prisons are meant to be reforming schools for the prisoners. By the corrupt practices of the officials , the prisons have become factories turning out hardened criminals.

Say , a person was caught by police on suspicion of pick-pocketing. The police produce the accussed before the magistrate , in turn he remands him for judicial custody. Let us consider , The punishment for this offence pick-pocketing as per law is 6 months imprisonment. However the case drags on for 3 years , finally the court finds him guilty of offence & orders for 6 months imprisonment. Totally, the offender serves 42 months imprisonment sentence in practice. In some cases , the courts consider the time already spent by the accussed behind the bars while giving judgement. In this example , even if the offender is let free taking 6 months imprisonment sentence, the offender has been given excess sentence of 36-6=30 months.

Taking the same example further, say the court finds the accused as innocent, not guilty of crime & lets him free. However , the poor chap has suffered 36 months imprisonment for no fault of his.

As per law, no body not even the courts of law are legally empowered to punish anybody beyond the legal procedures , rules established. In this way, due to delay in our legal system , faulty bail procedures , thousands of under-trials are suffering in various prisons throught India. Arew not the courts which remanded those accused to judicial custody responsible for this illegal act of excessive punishment ? what punishment should be given to those judges ?

The bail procedure in India , is also faulty without considering quantum of offence & financial status of the accused. A person accused of stealing rs.100 has to provide bail surety bond of rs.5000 or personal surety by a wealthy person / government servant. The poor person having personal contacts , friendship with rich persons / government servants is quite remote , so he cann't secure bail on personal bond. The poor chap's family is not rich enough to spend rs.5000 surety amount. As a result, unable to secure bail the poor chap suffers in jail for years.

Say, a rich industrialist is accused of rs.20 crores tax evasion, he is let free on a personal bond of rs.1 lakh. Stamp paper scam kingpin karim lala telgi has swindled government to the tune of thousands of crores of rupees, only few cases are registered against him. That too in one out of those cases involving rs.45 lakh worth stamp sale , judge has given him rigorous imprisonment plus a fine of rs.50000.

Considering the above examples it is quite clear the bail amount, fine amount are peanuts for the rich just a fraction of quantum of their crime , while for the poor it is huge many times more than the quantum of their crime.. it is biased towards rich & mighty criminals. As a result poor always suffers in jail, while rich are out on bail.

Even within prisons , the number of prisoners per sq.ft area , no of doctors , hospital beds , medicines available, weight of food per day given to prisoners , are all less & much below the statuotary limits. The food , health care , living conditions of prisoners , under-trials are worse than pigs. The prison authorities are utterly corrupt, which has been brought into light again & again by the media. If a poor prisoner questions the illegal acts of the officials , he is subjected to 3rd degree torture , roughed up by rowdy prisoners on the instigation of the officials themselves. Many poor prisoners are suffering from health problems , many are dying due to lack of proper health care & food in the prisons.

Whereas , the rich & mighty prisoners , by payting bribe get non-veg , alchoholic drinks from outside restaurants daily. They even secure drugs . they get spacious VIP rooms , television , mobile phones. They easily get parole & easily gets admitted in outside hospitals & roam free , while on record they are in-patients in hospitals.

The law of limitation which stipulates time limits for filing various cases is also biased towards the government as a party & rich , mighty. For the purposes of evidences , filing of cases one needs various government records. The concerned officials don't provide those records for years unless bribed & sit over the files for years. Some times by making absurd , illogical file notings , rejects it back. There is no time limit for the performance of duties by public servants. When a commoner don't get relevant records , files , evidences in time , how can he file cases in time without those records , evidences ?

Nowadays , numerous cases of irregularities , charges of corruption against judges are coming to light. However , in such cases judges are asked to resign from service but no criminal prosecution against them is instituted , only in cases involving lower court judges it is done. When a case of irregularity by a judge in a specific present case comes , there are every possibility that in the past also he has committed the same in cases handled by him which has not come to light. In such instances , all the cases handled by that particular judge throught his career must be reviewed , but is not done why ? does not it amount to cover-ups ?

In many cases the higher courts have turned down the verdicts of the lower courts , let free the innocents , absolved innocents of charges & annulled death sentences when appeals came before them. However , in all such cases , the lower court judges must be punished for giving out wrong judgements, meating out injustice to innocents. Here a fact must be noted , only a fraction of cases goes in appeal to higher courts, as in majority of cases the poor people lack the financial might to make the appeal. The so-called free legal services authority pre-judges the cases before giving legal aid. As a result , many innocents poor people resign to their fates suffer injustice in courts of law , undergo imprisonment punishment , some times even death sentence. So , the urgent need of the hour is to incorporate jury system or some outside monitoring system to review cases as & when decided.

In many cases involving the rich & mighty like telgi , case proceedings are conducted in-camera in judge's chambers or proceedings are conducted through video conferencing . outside from public gaze. The tapes are not made public and the public cannï¿½t even ascertain the validity of tapes , whether it is edited , doctored .

One of the basic reasons for delayed justice & worse prison conditions in India , is low number of judges , police personnel , higher rate of case adjournments and finally low amount of financial grants made by the government to judicial department / police department. The government states that it doesn't have enough money to provide for judiciary & police. As a result, fundamental / human rights of innocent commoners are thwarted. The state governments & GOI , is one of either parties in 75% of cases before various courts in India, it is the biggest litigant & is influencing the judiciary by controlling the grants , recruitment to judiciary & by enticing some with post-retirement postings.

We have utmost respect for the judiciary , but hereby humbly bringing the crimes of judiciary before the honest few judges seeking justice to the common folk.

FOREIGN TOURS OF INDIAN JUDGES AT TAXPAYER'S EXPENSE

New Delhi: CNN-IBN's exclusive report on some judges using official trips to holiday, has sparked off the debate - should judges be above the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act?

RTI activists say there is every reason why the RTI Act should apply to the higher judiciary as well.

Questions are now being asked in South Block, too, following the expose on Supreme Court judges.

Records obtained under the RTI shows judges have been converting work trips to holidays, taking long detours and are accompanied by their wives while traveling abroad.

At present there are no travel guidelines for the judiciary and the Bar Council of India is suggesting a course correction.

"I think the judges must pay or should pay the amount to the government," Bar Council of India Chairman SNP Sinha said in Patna on Wednesday.

Under the RTI, CNN-IBN found that for Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan's 11-day trip to Pretoria, South Africa in August 2007 the route was - Delhi, Dubai, Johannesburg, Nelspruit, Capetown, Johannesburg, Victoria Falls, where the judge finally didn't go and back to Delhi via Dubai.

Former chief justice YK Sabharwal attended three conferences in 2005 to Edinburgh, Washington and Paris. While the conferences lasted 11 days, Sabharwal was out for 38 days with 21 days converted into a private visit.

The travel plan included a detour from Washington to Baltimore, Orlando and Atlanta, before rejoining the conference route in Paris.

The First Class air fare for Sabharwal's entire trip was paid by the government.

Activists are now renewing the debate on the RTI act applying to judges as well

RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal said: "It only underscores why the RTI needs to be applied to judges and judiciary."

Just like Caesar's wife should be above suspicion, RTI activists are demanding that SC judges too should be seen to be accountable.

JUDGES IN PROVIDENT FUND SCAM ?

NEW DELHI: Faced with accusations having the potential to unhinge the traditional public perception of the judiciary's clean image, the SC on Monday decided to examine the possible mode of probe into the Rs 23 crore illegal PF withdrawal scam allegedly involving 23 judges, including some from the HCs and one from the apex court.
The difficult question on the mode of probe was posed by a petitioner, who is the chairman of Advocates Welfare Trust and Bar Association of Ghaziabad — the place where the scam took place — even as CJI K G Balakrishnan had shown faith in the integrity of the judges by asking the UP police, which is probing the scam, to send questionnaires to the judges, whose names allegedly figured in the scam.
Unwilling to have the judges interrogated by the police at first go, SC had written to the UP police that if the response of those judges to the questionnaire did not satisfy the probe team, then it could send request for personal interrogation.
The request for interrogation in person would be considered on merit, the SC had told the police in a communication. Appearing for the Bar, senior advocate Fali S Nariman flanked by senior advocates Anil Divan and M N Krishnamani expressed concern over the scandal and also pointed out the possible dent in the image of the judiciay if an SHO was seen interrogating a judge.
Bench comprising CJI Balakrishnan and Justices P Sathasivam and J M Panchal appeared undecided about the constitution of a committee as suggested by Nariman, it decided to seek the assistance of solicitor general G E Vahanvati to chart out a possible course to deal with the situation.
To keep the proceedings off the media glare, the bench decided to take up the matter in chamber on July 14, when Vahanvati and other senior advocates would make good their assistance to look for a way out of the problematic situation.
The petition said one Ashutosh Asthana, the Central Nazir in the judgeship of Ghaziabad, had allegedly confessed before a magistrate about his role in the PF scam and had allegedly mentioned the names of 23 judges who were beneficiaries of the ill-gotten money.